Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

The Murray who is the interlocutor in the Byron correspondence has a better charter of immortality granted to him than even Dr Smiles has been able to make out in his elaborate work.

We have now the counterpart of this correspondence presented to us in many of Murray's own letters; and while they do not present us with many fresh facts, they strongly confirm our previous opinion that it was a piece of rare good fortune for Byron to have Murray for his publisher and literary adviser. In a letter which we do not find quoted by Dr Smiles, Byron mentions that he had never met but three men who would have held out a finger to him, and of these Murray was the only one who offered it while he really wanted it. The Memoir before us renders Murray's good offices and Byron's gratitude quite intelligible.

The connection began with "Childe Harold."

Dallas, to whom Byron had presented the MS., brought it to Murray after

Miller had refused it on account of its sceptical views and an attack on Lord Elgin in the original. Murray consulted Gifford, whose opinion was favourable, and six hundred guineas were given for the copyright.

"That Mr Murray was quick in recognising," says Dr Smiles, "the just value of poetical works and the merits of Lord Byron's poem, is evident from the fact that at the very time that Miller declined to publish 'Childe Harold,' he accepted a poem by Rosa Matilda (Temple) which Murray had refused to publish, and that it was sold the year after as waste-paper, whilst Murray jumped at the offer of publishing Lord Byron's poem, and did not hesitate to purchase the copyright for a large price."

From the first, Murray was a critic as well as publisher of Byron's poetry; and fortified by the opinion of Gifford, against which his lordship was at first disposed to rebel, although he afterwards came to regard Gifford as an oracle, Murray is often found applauding, deprecating, and suggesting, as the sheets passed through the press. We quote at length from the first letter to Lord Byron given in these volumes, as it gives the key-note to Murray's intercourse with his noble author, and may serve as an excellent sample of numerous other admirable letters which want of space prevents us from even referring to.

"I have now the pleasure of send

ing you the first-proof sheets of your poem, which is so good as to be entitled to all your care in rendering it perfect. Besides its general merits, there are parts which, I am tempted to believe, far excel anything that you have hitherto published; and it were therefore grievous indeed, if you do not condescend to bestow upon it all the improvements of which your mind is so capable. Every correction already made is valuable, and this

circumstance renders me more confident in soliciting your further attention. There are some expressions concerning Spain and Portugal which, however just at the time they were conceived, yet as they do not harmonise with the now prevalent feeling, I am persuaded would so greatly interfere with the popularity which the poem is, in other respects, certainly calculated to excite, that in compassion to your publisher, who does not presume to reason upon the subject, otherwise than as a mere matter of business, I hope your goodness will induce you to remove them; and with them perhaps some religious sentiments which may deprive me of some customers amongst the orthodox. Could I flatter myself that these suggestions were not obtrusive, I would hazard another, that you would add the two promised cantos, and complete the poem. It were cruel indeed not to perfect a work which contains so much that is excellent. Your fame, my lord, demands it. You are raising a monument that will outlive your present feelings, and it should therefore be constructed in such a manner as to excite no other association than that of respect and admiration for your character and genius. I trust that you will pardon the warmth of this address, when I assure you that it arises in the greatest degree from a sincere regard for your best reputation; with, however, some view to that portion of it which must attend the publisher of so beautiful a poem as you are capable of rendering in the 'Romaunt of Childe Harold."

We have an amusing sketch of Byron at this time as he was wont to call at Fleet Street on his way from Jackson's boxing lessons, walking up and down the room delivering carte and tierce at the book-shelves, while his admiring publisher was venting his raptures over the poem. "You think that a good idea, do you, Murray?' Then he would fence and lunge with his walking-stick at some special book which he had picked out on the shelves before him." We can easily

understand that Murray was "often very glad to get rid of him.”

[ocr errors]

Then followed that splendid burst of song, beginning with "The Giaour," "The Bride of Abydos," Giaour," "The Corsair," and "Lara," in startling rapidity, which Byron continued to pour out with little intermission during the rest of his life, ranging over all the fields of poetry, lyrical, dramatic, and satirical. The correspondence marks the ripening intimacy; and when Byron finally left England, Murray remained his faithful correspondent, and the chief link between him and the world which he had abandoned. Flattering as the connection was, we can easily understand that it had an alloy of anxiety and doubt. It was impossible for the publisher of the Quarterly,' a chief censor morum and guardian of the literary proprieties of the day, not to have grave misgivings when he read the MSS. of "Cain," and of the successive cantos of "Don Juan," how these works were to affect his own reputation as well as the public mind. It is not an agreeable situation for a publisher to be called upon to consider whether a work is moral enough to carry copyright; and we find some indication of these perplexities in Dr Smiles's work, and a still clearer reflection of the publisher's scruples in Byron's own letters. It took a stout heart to stem the torrent of literary abuse-not all unmerited—that centred round the name of Byron, and Murray deserves all honour for his stout courage, while posterity has wholly justified his fidelity. The case was altogether an exceptional one. Byron's genius was sufficiently powerful to impose his poetry upon the world-a feat that has been predicable before or since of no other poet.

Moore, on his visit to Byron at

Venice in 1819, was presented by the poet with the MS. of his Memoirs-his 'Life and Adventures' he called it on the condition that it was not to be published until after his death, though he had no objection to Moore's at once disobjection to Moore's at once disposing of it. This, with a continuation which he received in the course of the following year, he endeavoured to dispose of to Longmans, but eventually he accepted Murray's offer of 2000 guineas, on condition that he should edit the MS. and write a Life. Murray informed Lady Byron of the Memoirs, and offered to submit them to her in case "she might wish to confute any of his statements; but she declined to read them, and considered their publication at any time 66 as prejudicial to Ada's future happiness." "For my own

[ocr errors]

sake I have no reason to shrink from publication; but notwithstanding the injuries which I have suffered, I should lament more of the consequences." The Memoirs were shown to several persons-to Lord John Russell among others-and the general verdict was that they were unpublishable. Lord Holland "seemed to think it was in cold blood-depositing a sort of quiver of poisoned arrows for a future warfare upon private character."

On Lord Byron's death, the Memoirs became Murray's absolute property. Lady Byron had offered to redeem them for the sum which Murray had paid to Moore, but the latter naturally reflected that such an act would seem like treachery to the memory of his deceased friend. He offered, however, to place the MS. at the disposal of Byron's sister, Mrs Leigh, "to be done with exactly as she thought proper." The result of much correspondence and deliberation was that a grand council was held in Murray's drawing-room,

when a scene took place worthy of being commemorated by the brush of a great historical painter.

"There were present Mr Murray, Mr Moore, Mr J. C. Hobhouse, Colonel Doyle representing Lady Byron, Mr Wilmot Horton representing Mrs Leigh, and Mr Luttrell, a friend of Moore's. Young Mr Murray,then sixteen; the only person of those assembled now living,—was The discussion also in the room. was long, and stormy before the meeting broke up, and nearly led to a challenge between Moore and Hobhouse. A reference to the agreement between Moore and Murray being necessary, for a long time that document could not be found. It was at length discovered, but only after the decision to commit the MS. to the

flames had been made and carried out, and the party remained until the last sheet of Lord Byron's Memoirs had vanished in smoke up the Albemarle Street chimney."

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

E

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

it. It was for Murray to "bell the cat," and the project of a Quarterly of equal critical weight, and of more patriotic political principles, was conceived by Murray. He took Canning into his confidence, who sent his brother Stratford to consult with the publisher. Murray had a formidable array of able contributors to pit against the talent of the 'Edinburgh.' Through Canning he was able to muster all the wits of the defunct Anti-Jacobin.' His aid to a number of Eton youths who had got entangled with the conduct of the Miniature,' a volume of essays, had given him a claim upon the friendship of Stratford Canning, Gally Knight, the Marquis Wellesley's sons, and other clever young men, whose assistance could be counted on. But it was on Walter Scott that Murray placed his chief reliance; and Scott, who had long patriotically borne with much patience the onslaughts of the Edinburgh' on his poems, eagerly entered into the enterprise, and was indefatigable in beating up for recruits. Scott brought in Southey, whose name, more than any other save Croker, was most associated with the Quarterly,' which afforded him the very outlet he needed for his marvellous range of reading, and for the opinions of his maturer years. Gifford was selected for the editorship, and in many respects a more fortunate choice could not have been made. It is true he suffered from bad health, and he lacked the punctuality necessary for securing the regular appearance of a periodical; but no man of his day could so readily detect the false amid the true coin of literature, or with more skill harmonise and co-ordinate the materials which came to his hand. It is not the least valuable feature

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

of Dr Smiles's volumes that they have at last done something like justice to Gifford, whose sharpness. and acidity of utterance have been remembered, while his more brilliant services to literature have been overlooked. Whether in the Anti-Jacobin' or the 'Quarterly Review,' no man in his generation did more for the conservation of a true and manly tone in English literature, or to put down the shallowness, affectation, and false sentiment that was threatening to pervert English taste in the transition period between the two centuries.

[ocr errors]

The Quarterly' did not create any great impression on its first appearance, and Murray's friends were somewhat of the nature of Job's comforters. Every one naturally had some fault to find with some article or other, although Scott, Ellis, and Canning were among the most active of the earlier contributors. Murray became anxious and Gifford pettish; and with No. 8 the circulation fell from 5000 to 4000, a decline with which the dilatory appearance of the number had probably something to do. With No. 9 Southey became a steady contributor, "and there was scarcely a number without one, and sometimes two and even three articles from his pen." In whatever measure the change was due to Southey's pen, from the date of his accession the prospects of the Quarterly' improved, and its circulation increased. No doubt much of the credit of the success belongs to Gifford, for we are told that "the interest and variety of its contents, and the skill of the editor in the arrangement of his materials, made up for many shortcomings." Other recruits began to drop in: Barrow and Croker, both from the Admiralty, the latter to become one of Murray's most ac

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

tive and valuable writers; the "poet-priest Milman;" John Taylor Coleridge; Philpotts, afterwards Bishop of Exeter; Thomas Mitchell the Grecian, and others of not less note. It was not, however, until 1817 that annus mirabilis in which 'Maga' first burst upon an admiring world-that the Quarterly' could boast a sale of 12,000 copies, rising soon after to 14,000. Gifford was a most skilful editor, conscientious as he was careful, and his drastic handling of accepted contributions frequently roused the ire of the writers-especially Southey and Croker-who were not always disposed to kiss the rod of correction. What Gifford called abridgment, Southey regarded as mutilation. Southey and the rest were not only contributors to but critics of the 'Quarterly,' and their opinions, if profitable, were not always pleasant to the editor and the publisher. "Southey is quite pleased with the whole of our number" (36), writes Gifford to Murray, "which he thinks a most amazing one. This was praise indeed from Southey, and never, I think, was so given to us before." "I am happy to tell you that your 'Review' is abominably bad," writes Croker of a subsequent number; "happy for your sake, because-as you will, I daresay, sell 12,000-it only shows that you have an estate which produces wholly independent of its culture." And after disposing of the contents more suo, he winds up thus: "In short, my dear Murray, bless your stars you have sounded the bass string of humility, and you may be assured that your next number will be better than the last, and so goodbye." Gifford, it may be remarked, contributed only one article to the Quarterly,' though he added largely to the contributions of others; and even in this article,

6

which had ominous consequences, he was assisted by Mr Barron Field. It was a paper on 'Ford's Dramatic Works,' in which, with his usual scathing scorn of some blasphemous maunderings, he spoke of Charles Lamb as a "poor maniac," quite unconscious of the force of the sting which the epithet conveyed When Gifford was made acquainted with the malady of the Lambs, he was greatly shocked. "All I ever

knew or ever heard," he wrote to Southey in the deepest contrition, "of Mr Lamb was merely his name. Had I been aware of one of the circumstances which you mention, I would have lost my right arm sooner than have written what I have. I pray God

to forgive me, since the blow has fallen heavily, when I really thought it would not be felt." Gifford himself seems to have pruned the cutting articles that came into his hands, and to have toned down all critical violence, a novel occupation for the editor of the 'AntiJacobin' and the author of the 'Baviad.' Gifford may be said to have died in harness; and as his health declined, the subject of his successor became an anxious question. Among others, . Nassau Senior was thought of, but finally choice was made of Mr Coleridge, afterwards Sir John Taylor Coleridge, the eminent judge. Coleridge's term of editorship was, however, short, and his prospects at the bar, too good to allow him to be tempted by a literary career, soon induced him to resign. Then came Lockhart, the greatest of all the 'Quarterly' editors, standing a head and shoulders above even Gifford himself. Connected with the importation of Lockhart to London, there is related in Dr Smiles's work a pleasant little comedy, although no doubt Murray, at whose ex

« PreviousContinue »