_Mr. Gifford to John Murray_,
JAMES STREET, _October_ 20, 1814.
My DEAR SIR,
What can I say in return for your interesting and amusing letter? I live here quite alone, and see n.o.body, so that I have not a word of news for you. I delight in your visit to Scotland, which I am sure would turn to good, and which I hope you will, as you say, periodically repeat. It makes me quite happy to find you beating up for recruits, and most ardently do I wish you success. Mention me kindly to Scott, and tell him how much I long to renew our wonted acquaintance. Southey"s article is, I think, excellent. I have softened matters a little. Barrow is hard at work on Flinders [_Q. R_. 23]. I have still a most melancholy house. My poor housekeeper is going fast. Nothing can save her, and I lend all my care to soften her declining days. She has a physician every second day, and takes a world of medicines, more for their profit than her own, poor thing. She lives on fruit, grapes princ.i.p.ally, and a little game, which is the only food she can digest. Guess at my expenses; but I owe in some measure the extension of my feeble life to her care through a long succession of years, and I would cheerfully divide my last farthing with her. I will not trouble you again on this subject, which is a mere concern of my own; but you have been very kind to her, and she is sensible of it."
With respect to this worthy woman, it may be added that she died on February 6, 1815, carefully waited on to the last by her affectionate master. She was buried in South Audley Churchyard, where Gifford erected a tomb over her, and placed on it a very touching epitaph, concluding with these words: "Her deeply-affected master erected this stone to her memory, as a faithful testimony of her uncommon worth, and of his grat.i.tude, respect, and affection for her long and meritorious services." [Footnote: It will serve to connect the narrative with one of the famous literary quarrels of the day, if we remind the reader that Hazlitt published a cruel and libellous pamphlet in 1819, ent.i.tled "A Letter to William Gifford," in which he hinted that some improper connection had subsisted between himself and his "frail memorial."
Hazlitt wrote this pamphlet because of a criticism on the "Round Table"
in the _Quarterly_, which Gifford did not write, and of a criticism of Hunt"s "Rimini," published by Mr. Murray, which was also the work of another writer. But Gifford never took any notice of these libellous attacks upon him. He held that secrecy between himself and the contributors to the _Quarterly_ was absolutely necessary. Hazlitt, in the above pamphlet, also attacks Murray, Croker, Canning, Southey, and others whom he supposed to be connected with the _Review_.]
Murray"s own description of his famous drawing-room may also be given, from a letter to a relative:
"I have lately ventured on the bold step of quitting the old establishment to which I have been so long attached, and have moved to one of the best, in every respect, that is known in my business, where I have succeeded in a manner the most complete and flattering. My house is excellent; and I transact all the departments of my business in an elegant library, which my drawing-room becomes during the morning; and there I am in the habit of seeing persons of the highest rank in literature and talent, such as Canning, Frere, Mackintosh, Southey, Campbell, Walter Scott, Madame de Stael, Gifford, Croker, Barrow, Lord Byron, and others; thus leading the most delightful life, with means of prosecuting my business with the highest honour and emolument."
It was in Murray"s drawing-room that Walter Scott and Lord Byron first met. They had already had some friendly intercourse by letter and had exchanged gifts, but in the early part of 1815 Scott was summoned to London on matters connected with his works. Mr. Murray wrote to Lord Byron on April 7:
"Walter Scott has this moment arrived, and will call to-day between three and four, for the chance of having the pleasure of seeing you before he sets out for Scotland. I will show you a beautiful caricature of Buonaparte."
Lord Byron called at the hour appointed, and was at once introduced to Mr. Scott, who was in waiting. They greeted each other in the most affectionate manner, and entered into a cordial conversation. How greatly Mr. Murray was gratified by a meeting which he had taken such pains to bring about, is shown by the following memorandum carefully preserved by him:
"1815. _Friday, April_ 7.--This day Lord Byron and Walter Scott met for the first time and were introduced by me to each other. They conversed together for nearly two hours. There were present, at different times, Mr. William Gifford, James Boswell (son of the biographer of Johnson), William Sotheby, Robert Wilmot, Richard Heber, and Mr. Dusgate."
Mr. Murray"s son--then John Murray, Junior--gives his recollections as follows:
"I can recollect seeing Lord Byron in Albemarle Street. So far as I can remember, he appeared to me rather a short man, with a handsome countenance, remarkable for the fine blue veins which ran over his pale, marble temples. He wore many rings on his fingers, and a brooch in his shirt-front, which was embroidered. When he called, he used to be dressed in a black dress-coat (as we should now call it), with grey, and sometimes nankeen trousers, his shirt open at the neck. Lord Byron"s deformity in his foot was very evident, especially as he walked downstairs. He carried a stick. After Scott and he had ended their conversation in the drawing-room, it was a curious sight to see the two greatest poets of the age--both lame--stumping downstairs side by side.
They continued to meet in Albemarle Street nearly every day, and remained together for two or three hours at a time. Lord Byron dined several times at Albemarle Street, On one of these occasions, he met Sir John Malcolm--a most agreeable and accomplished man--who was all the more interesting to Lord Byron, because of his intimate knowledge of Persia and India. After dinner, Sir John observed to Lord Byron, how much gratified he had been to meet him, and how surprised he was to find him so full of gaiety and entertaining conversation. Byron replied, "Perhaps you see me now at my best." Sometimes, though not often, Lord Byron read pa.s.sages from his poems to my father. His voice and manner were very impressive. His voice, in the deeper tones, bore some resemblance to that of Mrs. Siddons."
Shortly before this first interview between Scott and Byron the news had arrived that Bonaparte had escaped from Elba, and landed at Cannes on March 1, 1815.
A few days before--indeed on the day the battle was fought--Blackwood gave great praise to the new number of the _Quarterly_, containing the contrast of Bonaparte and Wellington. It happened that Southey wrote the article in No. 25, on the "Life and Achievements of Lord Wellington," in order to influence public opinion as much as possible, and to encourage the hearts of men throughout the country for the great contest about to take place in the Low Countries. About the same time Sir James Mackintosh had written an able and elaborate article for the _Edinburgh_, to show that the war ought to have been avoided, and that the consequences to England could only be unfortunate and inglorious.
The number was actually printed, st.i.tched, and ready for distribution in June; but it was thought better to wait a little, for fear of accidents, and especially for the purpose of using it instantly after the first reverse should occur, and thus to give it the force of prophecy. The Battle of Waterloo came like a thunderclap. The article was suppressed, and one on "Gall and his Craniology" subst.i.tuted. "I think," says Ticknor, "Southey said he had seen the repudiated article." [Footnote: "Life, Letters, and Journals of George Ticknor "(2nd ed.), i. p. 41.]
Lord Byron did not write another "Ode on Napoleon." He was altogether disappointed in his expectations. Nevertheless, he still, like Hazlitt, admired Napoleon, and hated Wellington. When he heard of the result of the Battle of Waterloo, and that Bonaparte was in full retreat upon Paris, he said, "I"m d----d sorry for it!"
Mr. Murray, about this time, began to adorn his dining-room with portraits of the distinguished men who met at his table. His portraits include those of Gifford, [Footnote: This portrait was not painted for Mr. Murray, but was purchased by him.] by Hoppner, R.A.; Byron and Southey, by Phillips; Scott and Washington Irving, by Stewart Newton; Croker, by Eddis, after Lawrence; Coleridge, Crabbe, Mrs. Somerville, Hallam, T. Moore, Lockhart, and others. In April 1815 we find Thomas Phillips, afterwards R.A., in communication with Mr. Murray, offering to paint for him a series of Kit-cat size at eighty guineas each, and in course of time his pictures, together with those of John Jackson, R.A., formed a most interesting gallery of the great literary men of the time, men and women of science, essayists, critics, Arctic voyagers, and discoverers in the regions of Central Africa.
Byron and Southey were asked to sit for their portraits to Phillips.
Though Byron was willing, and even thought it an honour, Southey pretended to grumble. To Miss Barker he wrote (November 9, 1815):
"Here, in London, I can find time for nothing; and, to make things worse, the Devil, who owes me an old grudge, has made me sit to Phillips for a picture for Murray. I have in my time been tormented in this manner so often, and to such little purpose, that I am half tempted to suppose the Devil was the inventor of portrait painting."
Meanwhile Mr. Murray was again in treaty for a share in a further work by Walter Scott. No sooner was the campaign of 1815 over, than a host of tourists visited France and the Low Countries, and amongst them Murray succeeded in making his long-intended trip to Paris, and Scott set out to visit the battlefields in Belgium. Before departing, Scott made an arrangement with John Ballantyne to publish the results of his travels, and he authorized him to offer the work to Murray, Constable, and the Longmans, in equal shares.
In 1815 a very remarkable collection of doc.u.ments was offered to Mr.
Murray for purchase and publication. They were in the possession of one of Napoleon"s generals, a friend of Miss Waldie. [Footnote: Afterwards Mrs. Eaton, author of "Letters from Italy."] The collection consisted of the personal correspondence of Bonaparte, when in the height of his power, with all the crowned heads and leading personages of Europe, upon subjects so strictly confidential that they had not even been communicated to their own ministers or private secretaries. They were consequently all written by their own hands.
As regards the contents of these letters, Mr. Murray had to depend upon his memory, after making a hurried perusal of them. He was not allowed to copy any of them, but merely took a rough list. No record was kept of the dates. Among them was a letter from the King of Bavaria, urging his claims as a true and faithful ally, and claiming for his reward the dominion of Wurtemberg.
There were several letters from the Prussian Royal family, including one from the King, insinuating that by the cession of Hanover to him his territorial frontier would be rendered more secure. The Emperor Paul, in a letter written on a small sc.r.a.p of paper, proposed to transfer his whole army to Napoleon, to be employed in turning the English out of India, provided he would prevent them pa.s.sing the Gut and enclosing the Baltic.
The Empress of Austria wrote an apology for the uncultivated state of mind of her daughter, Marie Louise, about to become Napoleon"s bride; but added that her imperfect education presented the advantage of allowing Napoleon to mould her opinions and principles in accordance with his own views and wishes.
This correspondence would probably have met with an immense sale, but Mr. Murray entertained doubts as to the propriety of publishing doc.u.ments so confidential, and declined to purchase them for the sum proposed. The next day, after his refusal, he ascertained that Prince Lieven had given, on behalf of his government, not less than 10,000 for the letters emanating from the Court of Russia alone. Thus the public missed the perusal of an important series of international scandals.
In December 1815 Mr. Murray published "Emma" for Miss Jane Austen, and so connected his name with another English cla.s.sic. Miss Austen"s first novel had been "Northanger Abbey." It remained long in ma.n.u.script, and eventually she had succeeded in selling it to a bookseller at Bath for 10. He had not the courage to publish it, and after it had remained in his possession for some years, Miss Austen bought it back for the same money he had paid for it. She next wrote "Sense and Sensibility," and "Pride and Prejudice." The latter book was summarily rejected by Mr.
Cadell. At length these two books were published anonymously by Mr.
Egerton, and though they did not make a sensation, they gradually attracted attention and obtained admirers. No one could be more surprised than the auth.o.r.ess, when she received no less than 150 from the profits of her first published work--"Sense and Sensibility."
When Miss Austen had finished "Emma," she put herself in communication with Mr. Murray, who read her "Pride and Prejudice," and sent it to Gifford. Gifford replied as follows:
_Mr. Gifford to John Murray_.
"I have for the first time looked into "Pride and Prejudice"; and it is really a very pretty thing. No dark pa.s.sages; no secret chambers; no wind-howlings in long galleries; no drops of blood upon a rusty dagger--things that should now be left to ladies" maids and sentimental washerwomen."
In a later letter he said:
_September_ 29, 1815.
"I have read "Pride and Prejudice" _again_--"tis very good--wretchedly printed, and so pointed as to be almost unintelligible. Make no apology for sending me anything to read or revise. I am always happy to do either, in the thought that it may be useful to you.
"Of "Emma," I have nothing but good to say. I was sure of the writer before you mentioned her. The MS., though plainly written, has yet some, indeed many little omissions; and an expression may now and then be amended in pa.s.sing through the press. I will readily undertake the revision."
Miss Austen"s two other novels, "Northanger Abbey" and "Persuasion,"
were also published by Murray, but did not appear until after her death in 1818. The profits of the four novels which had been published before her death did not amount to more than seven hundred pounds.
Mr. Murray also published the works of Mr. Malthus on "Rent," the "Corn Laws," and the "Essay on Population." His pamphlet on Rent appeared in March 1815.
Murray"s correspondence with Scott continued. On December 25, 1815, he wrote:
"I was about to tell you that Croker was so pleased with the idea of a Caledonian article from you, that he could not refrain from mentioning it to the Prince Regent, who is very fond of the subject, and he said he would be delighted, and is really anxious about it. Now, it occurs to me, as our _Edinburgh_ friends choose on many occasions to bring in the Prince"s name to abuse it, this might offer an equally fair opportunity of giving him that praise which is so justly due to his knowledge of the history of his country....
"I was with Lord Byron yesterday. He enquired after you, and bid me say how much he was indebted to your introduction of your poor Irish friend Maturin, who had sent him a tragedy, which Lord Byron received late in the evening, and read through, without being able to stop. He was so delighted with it that he sent it immediately to his fellow-manager, the Hon. George Lamb, who, late as it came to him, could not go to bed without finishing it. The result is that they have laid it before the rest of the Committee; they, or rather Lord Byron, feels it his duty to the author to offer it himself to the managers of Covent Garden. The poor fellow says in his letter that his hope of subsistence for his family for the next year rests upon what he can get for this play. I expressed a desire of doing something, and Lord Byron then confessed that he had sent him fifty guineas. I shall write to him tomorrow, and I think if you could draw some case for him and exhibit his merits, particularly if his play succeeds, I could induce Croker and Peel to interest themselves in his behalf, and get him a living.