of the limits: I did not lend him my name to be hawked about in this way. 1030.-To John Murray.1 Genoa, Oct 220 1822. SIR,-You have delivered to Mr. Hunt the Vision of Judgement without the preface,2 with which I had taken 1. The above letter was forwarded to John Murray by Douglas Kinnaird, with the following note : ་་ "Pall Mall East, Oct. 18, 1822. "DEAR SIR,-In transmitting to you the enclosed letter address'd "to you by Lord Byron, and which was sent to me in its present "state without envelope, I think it my duty to let you know that "his Lordship desired me not to deliver it if I thought it harsh. "With that commentary from Lord Byron, which assures you that "he meant not to have written anything unkind, I think it better "to put the letter in your hands, as it is on business and to the "point, directing, however, your attention to my want of judgement, "not to Lord Byron's feelings, as the cause of your annoyance if 'you be annoyed by it. For my own part I take the liberty to add "that I should and do see in it nothing but one more proof of the "propriety with which the epithet irritable has been applied to "the Genus Vatum. I hope you give me credit for preferring the "kinder office of a peacemaker to that of a Channel for communi"cating angry letters. If so, you will believe me to have none but "the best intentions in sending the enclosed letter, as it is right you "should know Lord B.'s wishes on the subject of the new Cantos, "and his own words speak plainest. After what I read to you "yesterday from a private letter of Lord B. to me, you will of "course not take literally all that he says about not altering. I "offer myself most readily to further any of your wishes in such a "matter in any manner in my power. "I have the honour to be, Dear Sir, 2. In The Examiner for Sunday, November 3, 1822 (p. 697) appeared the following paragraph : "The Liberal. "In the First Number of this work, just published, there ought "to have been a Preface to the Vision of Judgment, which would "have explained the full spirit of one or two passages that may be "misconstrued, and shewn more completely how Mr. Southey has "subjected himself and his cause to this sort of attack,—if indeed "any such evidence be wanting. The author was somewhat anxious particular pains, and particularly desired you to forward to him is this fair, is it honest? is it proper to be thus remiss with papers committed to your charge, and in which you knew that I was interested? You have also delivered to him some prose tracts incomplete, which you sent to me complete at the beginning of the year. I have no wish to repeat what I have so often been obliged to say, and I leave you to your own reflection on the manner in which you have conducted yourself towards me in this matter. I am your obed! ser, NOEL BYRON. P.S.-If you have (as seems apparently to be the case) purposely kept back the preface to the Vision, I can only say that I know no words strong enough to express my sense of such conduct. 1031.-To John Hanson. Genoa, Oct 239 1822. DEAR SIR, Mr. Godwin has waited on you by my desire, on the subject of the affairs of the late Mr. Shelley, Son of Sir T. Shelley, to whose will I am appointed one of the executors.2 I wish you to apply in "on the former point, lest he should be thought to bear harder than "he wished on the late Sovereign. The latter, perhaps, may be "explained at once by quoting and applying to Mr. Southey the "famous line about fools rushing in where angels fear to tread.' "But the fact is, that for some reasons best known to himself, Mr. 'Murray the bookseller, who was to have been the original pub"lisher of the Vision, contrived to evade sending the preface to the "present publisher." 1. William Godwin (1756-1836), father of Mary Shelley (born August 30, 1797), by his wife, Mary Wollstonecraft. 2. The allowance paid to Shelley by his father, Sir Timothy Shelley, was discontinued at his death. Mary Shelley and her son were unprovided for. Byron, first through Hanson, then by a behalf of the widow to Mr. Whitton, Sir T.'s Solicitor, to ascertain if any provision is intended to be made for Mrs. Shelley and the surviving infant son of Mr. S. It is presumed that at any rate the last quarter, due on Sept! 21st, will be paid into the hands of the usual receiver. I should also be glad of your own opinion of the will, and what you think best to be done in the extraordinary circumstances in which the relict is placed. A Mr. Peacock 1 is joint executor: he is of the India house. Mr. Godwin probably can obtain for you a sight of the will or a copy thereof. I remain, very truly yours ever, NOEL BYRON. P.S.-Address to Genoa. If there is anything to be said on my own private concerns, you can add it to your answer. letter to Sir Timothy himself, endeavoured to arrange some provision. "When I wrote to you last," says Mary Shelley to Jane Clairmont, December 20, 1822 (Life, etc., of M. W.Shelley, vol. ii. p. 55), "I think that I told you that Lord Byron had written to "Hanson, bidding him call upon Whitton. Hanson wrote to "Whitton, desiring an interview, which Whitton declined, request"ing Hanson to make his application by letter, which Hanson has "done, and I know no more. This does not look like an absolute "refusal, but Sir Timothy is so capricious that we cannot trust to appearances." Sir Timothy, however, not only declined to answer Hanson's application, but replied to Byron's letter with a direct refusal (ibid., pp. 65, 66). He did indeed offer to give the boy "the means of a suitable protection and care in this country, if he "shall be placed with a person I shall approve." But Mrs. Shelley, in a letter to Byron (ibid., p. 67), refused to give up the custody of her son. Sir Timothy, she says, "does not offer him an asylum in "his own house, but a beggarly provision under the care of a "stranger." Eventually provision was made by Sir T. Shelley. 1. For Thomas Love Peacock, see Letters, vol. v. p. 317, note 1. 1032.-To John Murray. Genoa, Oct. 24th 1822. DEAR SIR,-After I had thought the subject at an end, I have been obliged by yesterday's post to address a letter to you (through the care of Mr. J. Hunt), which will be unpleasant to you and is far from agreeable to me. But contrary to my repeated and earnest request, you have not forwarded to him the preface to "Quevedo "Redivivus" on which I laid great stress, and now it has appeared without! Many of the other things sent are also incomplete. You forget that a publisher is as responsible for the MSS. of a writer as a lawyer for his Client's title deeds. If you hold them back on purpose, it is a breach of trust and confidence; if you lose them by negligence, it is culpable negligence and not to be excused on the plea of carelessness. Who permits you thus to play with the feelings and reputation of a man who placed confidence in you? I must add that, if the preface and other things are not forthcoming, I shall be under the necessity of making your treatment of me in this respect public. You have also withheld the publication of Werner, etc. Why? You can make no plea about terms—since none are settled-on that subject. If you are offended with, or affronted by, Mr. J. Hunt, that is not a reason to juggle with me, and I will show you that I am not disposed to permit you to take advantage of my absence in a manner which, whatever may be your motive, can do little credit to you-and less to your instigators-for I firmly believe that there is some one behind the curtain playing you off upon this occasion. I know enough of the baseness of Mr. Southey and his employers to believe them capable of anything, and as for yourself, though I VOL. VI. K am very unwilling to believe you acting, wilfully and wittingly, as their tool, you leave me no other supposition but that, either by menaces or persuasions, they are rendering you an instrument of their purposes-personal and political. "On fair ground I could beat forty of "them," but not if my Armourer proves treacherous and spoils my weapons. I am truly sorry to be obliged to address you in such a manner; but you have forced me to do so. Your obed! s, N. B. P.S.-I have, since the above was written, received yours of the 11th, and as I am a "pitiful-hearted negro and can't keep resentment, it hath melted my flint. It is you who force yourself into contact with Mr. J. H.; if you deliver to him the MSS. mentioned, in their complete state, you will have no more trouble on that score. You must not separate Werner from the Oratorio H. and E. I have agreed to your omitting the one passage you objected to in the ultimate or penultimate chorus. You had better not send me the Quarterly on Cain, as it can only be in the preaching style, and may make me answer or say something disagreeable. I have completed and had copied the 10th and 11th Cantos of D. J. making in all 6 new ones-4 already sent to Mr. Kinnaird which I hope have arrived safely. Pray enquire and tell me if he is returned or no. I shall not assail Rogers if he lets me alone; but it is a sad old fellow. I have lost the original copy, which made me send for this one, of which I shall not make 1. Compare the "pitiful-hearted Titan" of Henry IV., Part I. act ii. sc. 4. |