No More Learning

Walpole, ten years before, had visited Vertue with the
purpose of learning something about the MSS, of the existence of
which he had previously heard. Vertue's notes, which are now
preserved at the British museum, are disjointed and difficult to
17 January 1742.


## p. 254 (#280) ############################################

254
Letter-Writers
decipher, and, therefore, it was much to Walpole's credit that he
was able to produce from them a useful book, which has been
constantly reprinted. Unfortunately, although a competent con-
noisseur, he had not sufficient knowledge to enable him to write
a satisfactory history of painting, and his editors had not suffi-
cient courage to correct his errors at all thoroughly, for he had
a wonderful craze respecting the historical value of some old
pictures which he had bought and incorrectly described in his
Anecdotes? . It can hardly be doubted that the existence of
Walpole's book has prevented the publication of a complete and
trustworthy history of English painting.
Walpole's next works were The Castle of Otranto (1764–5)
and The Mysterious Mother (1768). Byron affirmed that Walpole
was 'the father of the first romance and the last tragedy in our
language,' and he praised highly both romance and tragedy ; but
very few modern readers are likely to agree with him. The Castle
of Otranto was originally published as a translation from an
Italian original which appeared at Naples in 1529; but, when
success was assured, it was acknowledged by its author. Of this
story, which has become a sort of a classic of English literature,
though few now care to read it, some account has been given
in an earlier chapter? The Mysterious Mother was printed at
Strawberry hill in 1768; and, although Walpole perceived the
unfitness for the stage of a tragedy with so repulsive a subject, he
seems to have cherished a lingering hope of its production there,
as he wrote an epilogue to it for Mrs Clive to speak. In reading
the play we see that the slowness of the action was of itself
sufficient to exclude it from performance; for, even an eighteenth
century audience could not be expected to sit out four acts of
the ravings of a woman the cause of whose remorse and agony
is not disclosed until the end of the fifth act. Fanny Burney,
being on friendly terms with Walpole, was anxious to read the
play; but, after reading it, she felt a sort of indignant aversion rise'
in her mind against the wilful author of a story so horrible; all
the entertainment and pleasure I had received from Mr Walpole
seemed extinguished. Fanny's friend Mr Turbulent (Guiffardière)
said : ‘Mr Walpole has chosen a plan of which nothing can equal
the abomination but the absurdity. '
Historic Doubts on the Life and Reign of Richard III,
1 Cf. , for instance, his self-delusion as to his 'suit of the house of Lancaster,' long
since corrected by Sir George Scharf.
2 See chap. II, pp. 60–61, ante.


## p. 255 (#281) ############################################

Walpole on his Literary Work. Chesterfield 255
>
written about the same time as The Mysterious Mother, offers a
good example of Walpole’s literary work. He chose an interesting
subject and treated it with spirit. He was not, however, prepared
to undertake the necessary research, and thus laid himself open to
much severe criticism! As two of his chief opponents were Milles,
president, and Masters, a fellow, of the Society of Antiquaries, he
resigned his fellowship of the society and swore hostility to most
antiquaries, although a few, such as Cole and Gough, retained his
favour. He never forgave his critics ; but he had succumbed to
their censures after a short fight.
Walpole's own feelings respecting his literary productions were
very mixed. He wrote to Lady Ossory (15 September 1787):
I have several reasons for lamenting daily that I ever was author or
editor. . . . Were I to recommence my life, and thought as I do now I do not
believe that any consideration could induce me to be an author. . . . It is pride
not humility, that is the source of my present sentiments. I have a great
contempt for middling authors. We have not only betrayed want of genius
but want of judgement.
These confessions have been treated as untrue, and as an affected
condemnation of his writings. But this is unjust. He valued them
as containing his own opinions, well expressed, on subjects which
required elucidation ; but he knew that they were not sound
enough to bear learned criticism-and he quite sincerely repudiated
his possession of special learning.
From Horace Walpole’s we pass to some other names of
renown in the form of literature in which he excelled.
Philip, fourth earl of Chesterfield, was one of the foremost
English statesmen of his age ; but he was so unlike an ordinary
Englishman that his character has been much misunderstood by
his countrymen. He thoroughly appreciated the French, and was
appreciated by them in return. Sainte-Beuve considers him to
have united the good qualities of the two nations, and he describes
the Letters to his Son as a rich book, which, in spite of some
objectionable passages, contains not a page without some happy
observation worthy of being kept in remembrance. In any case,
Chesterfield must be considered a unique personality. He was
particularly unfortunate in his relations with Johnson, who was cer-
tainly not fair to him; and the cruel caricature in Barnaby Rudge
of him as Sir John Chester, described as an elegant and polite,
but heartless and unprincipled gentleman,' must have seriously
1 Cf. as to this essay chap. XII, post.


## p. 256 (#282) ############################################

256
Letter-Writers
injured his fame among many of those unacquainted with history.
He was not unprincipled or heartless, and selfishness was by no
means a marked feature of his character. His shining mental
qualities were universally acknowledged, and he was accepted
as a shrewd man of the world, with engaging manners; but
we can learn something more than this about him from his
letters.
Of Chesterfield's abilities as a statesman, his country did not
obtain the full benefit, largely in consequence of court intrigues ;
for, though the ablest statesman of his time, after Walpole (if Pitt
be left out), he was persistently set aside. His time came when
he was appointed lord lieutenant of Ireland in 1745. He held
office for less than a year, but proved his power of governing
in a dangerous time, by the measures which he took to prevent
disturbances. He gained the gratitude of the people, and the
memory of his rule during a critical period remained fresh for
more than a century. He retained his interest in Ireland, and
always considered the Irish as his countrymen, because he had
ruled over them. He withdrew from public life, partly on account
of ill health ; and, in 1752, his deafness had become very serious.
In 1757, he emerged from his retirement in order to effect a re-
conciliation between the duke of Newcastle and Pitt.
Chesterfield has the reputation of eloquence; but his was
not unstudied. Horace Walpole denied that Chesterfield was an
orator, because his speeches were written ; yet, in a letter to Mann
(15 December 1743), he declared that the finest oration (he) ever
did hear' was one from Chesterfield—and this was delivered
against Sir Robert Walpole. Chesterfield's wit, like his speeches,
was, to a certain extent, prepared ; but it was the kind of wit
which is the most agreeable form of wisdom.
Although he had many enemies, he had a genius for friendship.
His greatest friend was Richard, second earl of Scarborough,
whose character he drew-a man held in so high a general esteem
that Chesterfield declares:
He was the best man I ever knew, the dearest friend I ever had. . . . We
lived in intimate and unreserved friendship for twenty years, and to that I
owe much more than my pride will let my gratitude own.
On Scarborough’s melancholy death, Chesterfield wrote to his
protégé Dr Chenevix': 'We have both lost a good friend in Scar-
borough ; nobody can replace him to me; I wish I could replace
1 13 February 1740.


## p. 257 (#283) ############################################

Chesterfield's Letters
257
him to you; but as things stand I see no great hopes of it. ' Chester-
field appointed Chenevix to the first Irish bishopric in his gift
(Killaloe) and, shortly afterwards, translated him to Waterford. He
retained the bishop as a lifelong friend, and in the printed correspon-
dence there are many bright letters to him which are full of kindly
feeling, and to which he subscribed himself 'with the greatest truth
and affection. ' Another lifelong friend was the diplomatist Solomon
Dayrolles, a godson of Chesterfield, whose letters to him are of an
intimate character and full of the most natural feelings, expressed
in an altogether charming manner. The name of Dayrolles will al-
ways be associated with that of Chesterfield, because of the dying
statesman's considerate order, ‘Give Dayrolles a chair. ' Many other
interesting letters are to be found in the correspondence, such as
those to the Dublin bookseller, alderman Faulkener, whose friend-
ship Chesterfield secured when in Ireland and retained through
life; and Lady Suffolk, a much esteemed friend. This general
correspondence is extremely interesting, and the letters it contains
are models of what letters should be natural, kindly and witty.
But Chesterfield's fame as a letter-writer must rest on his
Letters to his Son and those to his Godson. His devotion to these
two young men is a very remarkable indication of his true
character. From 1737 (when his age was forty-three years) to the
year of his death, it became little less than an obsession. He
began writing letters of advice to his illegitimate son Philip
Stanhope when the child was only five years old. When he had
reached twenty-five, another Philip Stanhope (of Mansfield Wood-
house) was born. This was Chesterfield's godson and successor,
whose education he undertook, and to whom he began to write
educational letters when he was four years old. He, doubtless, was
led to undertake these letters by the recollection of the neglect he
had experienced from his own father, and his sense of its conse-
quences.
When sitting in judgment on Chesterfield's letters to his son,
we should not omit to remember that they were never intended for
any eye but that of the receiver. He wrote (21 January 1751):
You and I must now write to each other as friends and without the least
reserve; there will for the future be a thousand things in my letters which I
would not have any mortal living but yourself see or know.
The Letters are written in English, Latin and French, and con-
tain a large amount of valuable information on history, geography,
and so forth, put in an easy and convenient form for the pupil.
Philip Stanhope was censured for bad writing and bad spelling
17
E, L. X.
CH. XI.


## p. 258 (#284) ############################################

258
Letter-Writers
and for inattention. His father told him that nothing was too
small for attentive consideration and that concentrated attention
on one subject at a time was of paramount importance : There is
time enough for everything in the course of the day if you do one
thing at once, but there is not time enough in the year if you will
do two things at once. '
Honour and morality, the need of which is strongly urged in
the Letters, do not include sexual morality: the writer recom-
mends his son to seek intimate association with married women
of fashion, in order to improve his manners, which, by nature,
were somewhat boorish. The general principles of good breeding
continually urged in the Letters have been strangely misunder-
stood. The object of life is to be pleased, and, in order to attain
this, we must please others; but it is quite evident that more
than surface pleasing is here intended. Both respect for the
feelings of others and sympathy with them are enjoined. The
young man is told 'never to be ashamed of doing what is right,
but to use his own judgment instead of blindly following others
in what the fashionable world considers to be pleasure. Such is
a sample of Chesterfield's wise saws, many of which have become
familiar quotations, and which show his recollection of his own
bitterly repented mistakes in early life. When Philip Stanhope
went out into the world and his early education was completed,
his father continued to send him letters of advice; but, in 1768,
the young man died, and the father learned that he had been
married and had two sons. Chesterfield received this unexpected
news with composure, and wrote kindly to the widow, Eugenia
Stanhope, saying that he would undertake all the expenses con-
nected with the bringing up of her boys. He did not remove
them from her care, but took much interest in them, and became
attached to them, observing their different characters and advising
as to them.
Chesterfield's literary fame rests upon his Letters to his Son,
which were never intended for publication ; but it has been
augmented by his Letters to his Godson, which, also, were not
intended to see the light of publicity. Fourteen of the letters on
the art of pleasing, or, as the writer entitled them, "The Duty,
Utility and Means of Pleasing,' were first published in 1774 in four
numbers of The Edinburgh Magazine and Review. In 1776, they
were added to a Dublin edition of Letters to his Son, and were
incorrectly described as written to the son-instead of to the
godson. In 1778, they were reproduced as a supplement to


## p. 259 (#285) ############################################

Chesterfield's Letters. Fanny Burney 259
Maty's Memoirs of Lord Chesterfield. The complete series of
Chesterfield's Letters to his Godson was not printed until 1890,
when it was edited by the fourth earl of Carnarvon. Lord Car-
narvon, by means of the charming Life which he prefixed to the
Letters, placed Chesterfield's good name on a more substantial
basis than that upon which it had hitherto rested.
These Letters follow very much the plan of their predecessors.
They are sometimes in English, and more often in French. They
contain the same form of instruction and anecdote, are written
with the same mixture of wit and wisdom, and breathe the same
affectionate interest of the writer in the doings of his correspon-
dent. One of the letters may be specially mentioned, since it
inculcates the spirit of two commandments, on which, according
to the highest authority, 'hang all the law and the prophets. '
Chesterfield writes :
I must from time to time remind you of two much more important dutys,
which I hope you will never forget nor neglect. I mean your duty to God
and your duty to Man. . . . Your duty to Man is very short and clear, it is only to
do to him whatever you would be willing that he should do to you. And
remember in all the business of your life to ask your conscience this question
Should I be willing that this should be done to me? If your conscience
which will always tell you truth answer No, do not do that thing.
Chesterfield took immense pains to show his two pupils how to
live; and it evidently gave him great pleasure to watch over them,
and to express to each of them bis satisfaction in their progress.
He must, however, have suffered disappointment when he found
that, in point of manners, neither of them did justice to his in-
tentions. His son, we learn from others, was ‘loutish,' and Fanny
Burney says of his godson that 'with much share of humour, and
of good humour also, [he] has as little good breeding as any man I
ever met with. '
Fanny Burney bore two surnames in succession; but her maiden
name is that by which all true lovers know her, because it was when
she had no right to any but this that she wrote and gained her fame.
She may be Madame d'Arblay on certain formal occasions ; but the
author of Evelina is far too English for a foreign name to sit easy
upon her'. The pictures of important events and the intimate re-
cords of Fanny's distinguished friends in her diaries and letters place
these writings on a very high plane, entitling them to rank as re-
productions of eighteenth century life not very far below the volumes
of Walpole and Boswell. She relates all she saw and did with so
As to Fanny Burney as a novelist, see chap. II, pp. 63 ff. ante.
17-2


## p. 260 (#286) ############################################

260
-
Letter-Writers
much spirit and vivacity, filling in the blanks of other writers, that
the reading of the various incidents is an inexhaustible pleasure.
It may, indeed, be said that she discloses the inner life of three
different worlds. In her Early Diary (1768–78), edited by Mrs
Ellis (1889), the doings of her family are fully displayed, and the
professional world of Dr Burney (that clever dog,' as Johnson
called him) is brightly sketched ; Garrick, too, is constantly gliding
over the scene and playing the fool in his inimitable way. But the
most popular character of all is the eccentric ‘daddy' Crisp—Samuel
Crisp, the recluse of Chessington hall near Epsom-who was the
special friend and correspondent of his 'Fannikin. ' In the later
Diary and Letters (1778–1840), edited by Mrs Charlotte Barrett
(1842–6), there is more about the larger literary and political
world, including the great event of the Hastings trial. The full
and particular account of court life is of the greatest interest and
value. On 6 July 1786, Fanny Burney was appointed second
keeper of the robes to queen Charlotte, a position she held for
five years. She received much kindness from the king and queen,
who were fond of her; and, although, by reason of the rigid eti-
quette, the service was hard, she had much pleasant intercourse
with her companions in the palace, whose portraits she painted
with spirit. Her great and incessant trouble, however, was her
inevitable long and close association with the terrible Mrs Schwel-
lenberg, otherwise Cerbera. In course of time, the confinement
which Fanny had to undergo affected her health, and her friends
cried out for her release, even Walpole uttering complaints.
Windham threatened to set ‘The Club' on Dr Burney to induce
him to obtain her freedom, and Boswell threatened to interfere
-much to Fanny's annoyance, for she did not love the 'memoran-
dummer' as she called him. Eventually, arrangements were made,
and she finally left court in July 1791, the queen granting out of
her own privy purse a pension or retiring allowance.
A most interesting feature of these diaries and letters is the
introduction of clear-cut portraits of the people whom the writer
knew and met. Johnson alluded to her powers in this respect
when he addressed her as 'You little character-monger'; and, here,
her early novel writing stood her in good stead. The description
of Boswell's persecution of her at Windsor, while pressing un-
successfully for the use of Johnson's letters, and reading to her, at
the gates of the castle which she would not let him enter, bits
from the forthcoming Life, is a fine bit of high comedy. Among
Fanny Burney's later friends were the Lockes, owners of Norbury


## p. 261 (#287) ############################################

Mrs Elizabeth Montagu
261
-
-
park, above the vale of Mickleham. On her frequent visits to her
hospitable friends, she became intimate with the French émigrés
at Juniper hall; and, on 31 July 1793, she was married to one of
them-d'Arblay-at Mickleham church. The pair had but little
upon which to set up house; but Locke gave them a site, and
the handsome subscription of generous friends for the novel
Camilla produced sufficient funds for building a cottage, which
was named Camilla Lacey. The marriage was a happy one in
spite of lack of means; but, in 1801, d'Arblay determined to
return to France, and his wife followed him. The restoration
of Louis XVIII brought better times, but, in July 1815, general
d'Arblay met with an accident and was placed on the retired
list of the French army. Austin Dobson describes him as one of
the most delightful figures in his wife's Diary. On 3 May 1818,
he died at Bath. This sad event virtually closes the work, and,
although Madame d'Arblay lived until 1840, there are few letters
left after her husband's death,
Mrs Elizabeth Montagu was one of a bright company of
brilliant women'; and, in spite of rivals, she reigned supreme for
fifty years as the chosen hostess of the intellectual society of
London. Mrs Vesey, for a time, was a prominent rival, because, as
wife of Agmondesham Vesey, a member of 'The Club,' she came
forward as the special hostess of that select company. The fame
of Mrs Montagu has much waned, and, probably, her letters,
published by her nephew Matthew Montagu in 1809–13, are little
read now. This collection does not reach a date later than 1761 ;
of the remainder of the correspondence from that date to the end
of Mrs Montagu's life, consisting, for the most part, of letters to
Mrs Robinson and a few other friends, Doran made a selection,
which he printed with remarks of his own in biographical form, in
1873, under the title A Lady of the last Century (Mrs Elizabeth
Montagu) illustrated in her unpublished Letters. Although this
lady was surrounded by the intellect of her time (she informed
Garrick that she never invited idiots to her house), she did not suc-
ceed in emulating Fanny Burney in the portraiture of her friends.
Windham praised her letters highly, but more for their style than
for the particular interest of the subjects discussed. The flow of
her style,' he writes, 'is not less natural, because it is fully charged
with shining particles, and sparkles as it flows. ' Her correspondent
1 For & general account of the Blue Stockings, see vol. XI. The word first occurg
in Mrs Montagu's correspondence, in 1757.


## p. 262 (#288) ############################################

262
Letter-Writers
during fifty years was Lady Margaret Harley, daughter of the
second earl of Oxford and wife of the second duke of Portland,
who was also a life long friend of Mrs Delany.
Elizabeth Robinson was the elder daughter of Matthew Robinson,
a Yorkshire squire, and her early education was advanced by the
instruction of Dr Conyers Middleton, the second husband of her
maternal grandmother, who lived at Cambridge. Her father, also,
was fond of encouraging her to make smart repartees to his witty
and caustic remarks, until he was beaten in these encounters and
had to discontinue them. She became rather a formidable young
lady and from her volatile disposition she acquired the sobriquet
'Fidget. ' She married, in 1742, Edward Montagu, a grandson of
the first earl of Sandwich, a quiet man who was contented that his
wife should rule in her own drawing-room. Doran describes him
as 'a mathematician of great eminence and a coal-owner of great
wealth. ' The match appears to have been a happy one, although
the tastes of the two parties were very different.
Mrs Montagu was fond of society, and the pleasures of
the town had a great attraction for her ; but she was also
a great reader and somewhat of a student, so she was often
glad to exchange the gaieties of London for the quiet pleasures
of the country. She formed a sort of salon at her house in Hill
street and gathered a brilliant company round her. Johnson
was glad to be one of her honoured guests; but his feelings
towards her seem to have been mixed. He acknowledged that
she was 'a very extraordinary woman,' adding ‘she has a constant
stream of conversation, and it is always iinpregnated, it has
always meaning. At other times, he said some disagreeable
things of her and to her. Something in her talk seems to have
annoyed him-possibly her sharp repartees may not have pleased
the dogmatic doctor. Lyttelton, Burke, Wilberforce and Reynolds
were also among her favourite guests. Mrs Montagu's husband
died in 1775 and left all his property to his wife; but, though
Horace Walpole at once jumped to the conclusion that she would
marry again, she preferred to adopt a nephew, who succeeded to
her possessions. She continued to be a hostess and built herself
a mansion on the north-west corner of Portman square; but the
glory had, to a great extent, departed, and the large parties that
could be accommodated in the new house were dull compared with
the smaller gatherings in Hill street. In her later letters, she
gives much information respecting the management of her large
estates, in which she proved herself a good economist. Her Essay


## p. 263 (#289) ############################################

David Garrick
263
on the Writings and Genius of Shakespeare with Remarks upon
the Misrepresentations of Mons. De Voltaire (1769) has been
noticed elsewhere.
David Garrick was a brilliant and agreeable letter-writer, and,
even when angry with those correspondents who worried him
exceedingly, he continued to be bright and lively in his replies.
His letters give an admirable idea of his mercurial disposition, and
it has been said that he was never second in the keenest encounter
of wits. The two quarto volumes of his correspondence, published
by James Boaden in 1831-2, are of great value and interest, con-
sisting of letters from many distinguished persons, and his answers
to them. The miscellaneous letters were collected by Garrick
himself, and copies of his own letters added to them. It has
been suggested that he may have had the intention of using
them as the groundwork of an autobiography; at any rate, he
must have considered it important to keep the originals of his
various controversies for his own justification. The correspondence
is now preserved, together with family letters (not printed by
Boaden) and some others, in the Forster collection at the Victoria
and Albert museum. They form thirty-five bound volumes and
are of considerable value. Boaden, however, arranged the letters
carelessly, without putting his materials in a satisfactory chrono-
logical order or providing a much-needed index ; but he added a
good life of the actor, largely founded upon the materials printed
by him. An improved, and more convenient, edition containing a
fairly complete collection of Garrick's letters, while condensing
those of his correspondents, would be a valuable addition to our
literature. As it is, however, Boaden's collection shows how
important a figure Garrick filled in the intellectual world of the
eighteenth century.
The list of his correspondents contains the names of most of the
distinguished men of his time, such as Lords Camden, Chatham
and Lyttelton, Johnson, Burke, Reynolds, Goldsmith, Boswell,
Burney, Hogarth, Hume, Sheridan and Steevens. Burke, who enter-
tained the highest opinion of Garrick, was one of his best friends.
He addressed him as 'My dear David,' 'My dear Garrick' and
sometimes ‘My dearest Garrick,' and concluded his letters in terms
of affection. Johnson and Garrick, notwithstanding their early
relations, never got further than 'Dear sir,' and ended their letters
1 See ante, vol. v, p. 293 ; and of. vol. XI.
For Garrick as an actor, manager and dramatist, see chap, iv, pp. 85–86, ante.
6


## p. 264 (#290) ############################################

264
Letter-Writers
in formal style. Mrs Montagu was a frequent correspondent and
the writer of some of the best letters in the collection. On one
occasion, she is found entreating Garrick, on behalf of her friend
Mrs Vesey, to obtain the election of that lady's husband Agmondes-
ham Vesey, into the select circle of The Club. ' The bulk of the
''
correspondence relates to theatrical affairs, as to which Garrick
was in constant trouble, by reason of his strenuous attention to his
duties as manager. The actors are constantly complaining, and the
actresses, who were jealous of him and of each other, sometimes
almost drove him mad. Mrs Cibber, Mrs Yates, Mrs Abington
and Mrs Clive-all gave trouble in various ways; but Garrick's
feelings were essentially different as to the last two ladies in the
list. Mrs Abington permanently annoyed him. He added to a
letter, written by her in 1776 : ‘The above is a true copy of the
letter, examined word by word, of that worst of bad women Mrs
Abington, to ask my playing for her benefit, and why? ' On the
other hand, Kitty Clive and he were always quarrelling and
making it up, since they thoroughly esteemed each other. In
1765, Kitty wrote an angry letter: 'Sir, I beg you would do me
the favour to let me know if it was by your order that my money
was stopped last Saturday. ' In 1776, she wrote a letter which
Garrick endorsed 'My Pivy-excellent. It was not only the
‘'
actors and actresses who annoyed Garrick-the playwrights were
equally, if not more, troublesome. There is a long series of letters
between Murphy and Garrick, which shows that they were con-
tinually at war with one another. The latter part of the second
volume of Boaden's work is full of interesting letters from French-
men and Frenchwomen of distinction, proving how highly Garrick's
genius was appreciated in France. Diderot, Marmontel, Mme
Necker, Fréron, Mlle Clairon and Le Kain were among his corre-
spondents.
The letters of Garrick do not throw much light upon his training
for the stage. He seems to have been born an actor, with all the
qualities of a first-rate comedian, while his achievements as a
tragedian were the result of his genius and the powers of his
imagination. He was of no school, and he had no master. He was
well educated and possessed a singular charm of manner; but he
obtained his great position by incessant study, persistent practice
and wide observation. Burke described him as one of the deepest
observers of man. Well might Quin say that, if Garrick was right,
he and his school were all wrong! He liked to astonish spectators
by his sudden change from the all-inspiring tragedian to the


## p. 265 (#291) ############################################

Reynolds's Discourses
265
laughter-forcing comedian. His Lear and his Abel Drugger were
equally amazing. It was the freshness, the brightness and life of
his style that made the instant acceptance of him as the greatest
of living actors secure. At thirty, he was joint lessee of Drury lane
theatre. In 1776, he retired from the stage and sold his moiety of
the theatre to Sheridan, Linley and Ford. He kept up his interest in
the stage; but he had little time to enjoy his well earned rest,
and died in 1779, universally regretted. Burke wrote an epitaph,
which unfortunately was rejected in favour of a foolish inscription
by Pratt, for the monument in Westminster abbey. It was in a
passage of the former that Garrick was said to have raised the
character of his profession to the rank of a liberal art. '
a
6
It may not seem inappropriate to add in this place a few words
concerning the series of Discourses delivered by Sir Joshua
Reynolds, from 1769 to 1790, to the students of the Royal Academy.
These Discourses have become a classic of our language, because
they are justly regarded as a model of art criticism, devoted
as they are to essentials and written in a style of great beauty
and distinction, and exhibiting in every page Reynolds's love and
knowledge of his art, as well as the literary powers of his mind. The
advice of a master grounded on his own knowledge and practice
must always possess a real value, and Reynolds is severe in his
condemnation of the futility of much art criticism by amateurs.
“There are,' he writes,' many writers on our Art, who not being of the pro-
fession and consequently not knowing what can or what cannot be done, have
been very liberal of absurd praises in their descriptions of favourite works.
They always find in them what they are resolved to find. And, again: 'it has
been the fate of Arts to be enveloped in mysterious and incomprehensible
language, as if it was thought necessary that even the terms should correspond
to the idea entertained of the instability and uncertainty of the rules which
they expressed.
In urging the duty of industry and perseverance, he has been
supposed to imply a doubt as to the existence of genius; but, when
he affirms that the supposed genius must use the same hard means
of obtaining success as are imposed upon others, a deeper scepticism
than was really bis need not be imputed to him. It was a false
idea of genius which he desired to correct.
Genius is supposed to be a power of producing excellences which are out of
the reach of the rules of art: a power which no precepts can teach, and which
no industry can acquire.
In another place, he says :
The industry which I principally recommended is not the industry of
the hands, but of the mind. ' Further, when advocating the duty of clear


## p. 266 (#292) ############################################

266
-
Letter-Writers
a
expression: 'If in order to be intelligible, I appear to degrade art by bringing
her down from the visionary situation in the clouds, it is only to give her a
solid mansion upon the earth. '
The first Discourse was delivered at the opening of the Royal
Academy and deals with the advantages to be expected from the
institution of that body. The ninth Discourse is, again, general,
and was delivered on the removal of the Royal Academy from Pall
Mall to Somerset place. The fifteenth and last contains the
president's farewell to the students and members of the Royal
Academy and a review of the scope of the Discourses, ending with
an eulogium on Michel Angelo :
I reflect not without vanity that these Discourses bear testimony of my
admiration of that truly divine man; and I should desire that the last words
which I should pronounce in this Academy, and from this place, might be the
name of MICHEL ANGELO.
Burke, who was in the president's chair, then descended from the
rostrum, taking the lecturer's hand, and said, in Milton's words :
The Angel ended, and in Adam's ear
So charming left his voice, that he awhile
Thought him still speaking, still stood fix'd to hear1.
The incident illustrates the deep interest taken by Burke in his
friend's Discourses ; and it has been suggested that he had much
to do with their composition. But they so evidently contain
Reynolds's own individual views, and the thoughts are expressed
so naturally and clearly, that such an idea must be put aside as
absurd. Reynolds was a highly cultured man, and, doubtless, he
gained much in clearness of literary insight by his intimate asso-
ciation with such men as Johnson and Burke; but a careful study
of the Discourses would prove to most readers that the language
as well as the thoughts were Reynolds's own. He was, however,
not the man to reject suggested improvement in style from his
distinguished friends, and, doubtless, both Johnson and Burke
proposed some verbal improvements in the proofs.
The general reception of the work was extremely favourable ;
and that it was appreciated abroad is evidenced by the empress
Catharine of Russia's present to Reynolds of a gold snuffbox,
adorned with her portrait in relief, set in diamonds, as an expres-
sion of her appreciation of the Discourses.
The plan of the Discourses, carried on through many years, is
consistent throughout. The writer did not interfere with the
teaching of the professors; but it was his aim to deal with the
i Paradise Lost, bk VIII, vv. 1-3.


## p. 267 (#293) ############################################

Hannah More
267
general principles underlying the art. He started by pointing out
the dangers of facility, as there is no short path to excellence.
When the pupil's genius has received its utmost improvement,
rules may, possibly, be dispensed with ; but the author adds: “Let
us not destroy the scaffold until we have raised the building. ' In
claiming the right to teach, he modestly says that his hints are in
a great degree founded on his own mistakes.
The earlier half of the series dealt with the objects of study, the
leading principles to be kept in view and the four general ideas
which regulate every branch of the art—invention, expression,
colouring and drapery. Much stress is laid upon the importance
of imitation ; but this word must be accurately defined :
Study Nature attentively but always with those masters in your company;
consider them as models which you are to imitate, and at the same time as
rivals with whom you are to contend.
The second half is appropriated to the consideration of more
general points, such as genius and imagination. The tenth Dis-
course, on sculpture, is the least satisfactory of the series. The
fourteenth Discourse is of special interest as relating to Gains-
borough ; and the particulars of the meeting of the two great
painters at the death-bed of Gainsborough are charmingly related.
Although great changes have taken place in public opinion in
the relative estimation of various schools of painting, most of
Reynolds's remarks, dealing as they do with essentials, remain of
value. The book is charming reading for all who love art, and the
reader will close it with a higher appreciation of the character of
the man and the remarkable insight of the great painter.
Hannah More's life was a remarkable one, and her fame as
an author, at one time considerable, was kept alive until near the
middle of the nineteenth century. It is at present nearly dead
and is not likely to revive. But her correspondence is most
undeservedly neglected, for she was a good letter-writer, and her
accounts of the doings of the intellectual world are of great interest,
and worthy to be read after Fanny Burney and Mrs Thrale. We
have full information respecting the doings of Johnson's circle from
different points of view; but there is much fresh information in
Hannah More's letters. Boswell was offended with the young lady
and is often spiteful in his remarks about her. The story of the
value of her flattery has been made too much of, for there is
1 See Boswell's Life of Johnson, ed. Hill, G. B. , vol. II, p. 293.


## p. 268 (#294) ############################################

268
Letter-Writers
plenty of evidence that Johnson highly esteemed the character
of Hannah More. Sally More was a lively writer and she
gives a vivid picture of her sister's intercourse with Johnson in
1775.
We drank tea at Sir Joshua's with Dr Johnson. Hannah is certainly a great
favourite. She was placed next him, and they had the entire conversation to
themselves. They were both in remarkably high spirits; it was certainly her
lucky night! I have never heard her say so many good things. The old
genius was extremely jocular, and the young one very pleasant.
The scene had changed when Hannah More met Johnson at
Oxford, in the year of his death, at dinner in the lodge at Pem-
broke. She wrote home :
wan.
Who do you think is my principal cicerone at Oxford ? Only Dr Johnson,
and we do so gallant it about! You cannot imagine with what delight he
showed me every part of his own college. . . . When we came into the Common
room, we spied a fine large print of Johnson, framed and hung up that very
morning with this motto: ‘And is not Johnson ours, himself a host ? ' Under
which stared you in the face ‘From Miss More's Sensibility. ' This little
incident amused us;-but alas! Johnson looks very ill indeed-spiritless and
However he made an effort to be cheerful and I exerted myself much
to make him so.
The triumphant entrance into the great London world by
Hannah More, a young Bristol schoolmistress, is difficult to account
for except on the grounds of her remarkable abilities. An agree-
able young lady of seven and twenty, fresh from the provinces, who
gained at once the cordial friendship not only of Garrick, Reynolds,
Johnson and Horace Walpole but of Mrs Elizabeth Montagu and
the literary ladies of the day, and who became herself one of the
leaders of the Blue Stockings, must have been a woman very much
out of the common. When Hannah More came first to London,
she visited Reynolds, whose sister promised to introduce her to
Johnson. She then met Garrick, who was first interested in her
because of some intelligent criticism of his acting which he had
seen. He and his wife became Hannah's dearest friends, and, on
hearing of Mrs Garrick's death, Hannah More wrote to a friend
(21 October 1822) :
I spent above twenty winters under her roof, and gratefully remember not
only their personal kindness, but my first introduction through them into a
society remarkable for rank, literature and talents.
She kept up her correspondence with her distinguished London
friends ; but most of them had died before she had arrived at
middle age. We then notice a considerable change in the subjects
of her correspondence, and her letters are occupied with the


## p. 269 (#295) ############################################

White of Selborne
269
progress of some of the great movements in which she was
interested. Wilberforce was a constant correspondent, and he found
her a warm helper in the anti-slavery cause. When she and her
sisters gave up their school at Bristol and retired on a competence,
she devoted all her time to philanthropic purposes. This is not the
place for dealing with the subjects of her voluminous writings, and
they are only referred to here as an indication of the more serious
character of the later correspondence? .
Gilbert White's Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne
(1789) holds a unique position in English literature as the solitary
classic of natural history. It is not easy to give, in a few words,
a reason for its remarkable success. It is, in fact, not so much
a logically arranged and systematic book as an invaluable record
of the life work of a simple and refined man who succeeded in
picturing himself as well as what he saw. The reader is carried
along by his interest in the results of far-sighted observation; but,
more than this, the reader imbibes the spirit of the writer which
pervades the whole book and endears it to like-minded naturalists
as a valued companion.
For some twenty years or more (1767—87), White wrote a
series of letters to Thomas Pennant and Daines Barrington, giving
a remarkable account of the chief instances of the special habits of
animals and of natural phenomena which he was daily observing.
Although these correspondents asked him questions and remarked
upon his observations, they learned much more from White than
he from them. Pennant is severely criticised by Thomas Bell, one
of the editors of White's work, who writes : The man to whom
the vain and self-seeking author of "British Zoology” was so
greatly indebted is almost entirely ignored. ' The late Alfred
Newton, in his notice of Gilbert White in The Dictionary of
National Biography, however, exonerates Pennant, noting that
'In the preface he generally but fully acknowledges White's
services. ' White's friendship with Barrington appears to have
begun about the end of 1767, the first published letter to him
being dated June 1769. Barrington, in 1770, suggested the
publication of White's observations; but, although White thought
favourably of the advice, he was diffident and did not prepare his
materials for press until January 1788. Even then, there was more
delay, so the book was not published until 1789.
White seems to have collected largely, with the ultimate object
1 Cf. , as to Hannah More, post, vol. XI.


## p. 270 (#296) ############################################

270
Letter-Writers
of forming a naturalist's calendar; for, writing to Pennant on
19 July 1771, he expresses his diffidence in respect to publishing
his notes because
I ought to have begun it twenty years ago. If I was to attempt anything, it
should be somewhat of a Natural History of my native parish, an Annus
Historio-Naturalis, comprising a journal for one whole year, and illustrated
with large notes and observations. '
Eventually, he did not make any considerable alteration in his
letters but left all the vivid pictures in their original setting ; and
The Naturalist's Calendar did not see the light until two years
after his death-in 1795.
A Quarterly reviewer? , speaking of White, describes him as
'a man the power of whose writings has immortalised an obscure
village and a tortoise,--for who has not heard of Timothy-as long
as the English language lives. The life history of Timothy may be
read in White's letters, and in the amusing letter to Miss Hecky
Mulso, afterwards Mrs Chapone (31 August 1784), written by him
in the name of Timothy. The tortoise was an American, born in
1734 in the province of Virginia, who remembered the death of his
great-great-grandfather in the 160th year of his age. Thomas Bell
disputes the American origin and believes the animal to have
belonged to a north African species, naming it testudo marginata;
but Bennet'held that it was distinct and he described and named
it T. Whitei, after the man who had immortalised it.
Selborne may be obscure ; but it is a beautiful village in a
beautiful country eminently suited for the purpose of White in
making it the centre of a life's work of zoological research and
observation. The book was immediately popular both with the
general public and with all naturalists, many of the most eminent
of which class have successively edited it with additional and
corroborative notes.
White's was an uneventful life as we usually understand the
phrase ; but it was also a full and busy one, the results of which
have greatly benefited his fellow men. He was born and died at
Selborne; and that delightful neighbourhood was the centre of his
world. But it would be a mistake to forget that he was a man of
capacity equal to the duties of a larger sphere. He was for fifty
years a fellow of Oriel college, Oxford, and, for some of these
years, dean of the college. In 1757, there was an election for the
provostship, when, although Musgrave was chosen, White had
many supporters. He quitted residence at Oxford in the following
1 Vol. LXXI, no. 141, p. 8 note; art. on The Honey-Bee.


## p. 271 (#297) ############################################

The Warwickshire Coterie
271
year, with the intention of settling permanently at Selborne. He
refused several college livings for this reason, although he held
the living of Moreton Pinckney in Northamptonshire as a non-
resident incumbent. Notwithstanding this apparent indifference
to duty, he worked successively in several curacies, the last being
that of his beloved Selborne.
II
THE WARWICKSHIRE COTERIE
Somewhat apart from the more famous letter-writers of the
age stood a circle of friends, some of whom might be described
as in the great world while none were exactly of it, whose corre-
spondence, and more general literary work, are full of interest.
They were all, at one time or another, dwellers in Warwickshire or
on its borders, lived at no great distance from each other and
wrote frequently when they did not meet. Perhaps the poet
Shenstone is the most obvious link between them : they all were
acquainted with him, if they were not all personally known to
each other. The circle includes Henrietta Lady Luxborough, of
Barrels near Henley-in-Arden ; Frances duchess of Somerset, one
of whose residences was Ragley near Alcester ; Richard Graves,
who belonged to the family which owned Mickleton, not actually
in Warwickshire but not far from Stratford-on-Avon ; Richard
Jago, who was vicar of Harbury and held other cures in the county;
William Somerville, of Edstone near Henley ; and it was com-
pleted by persons who were not so much writers themselves as
friends of men of letters, such as Anthony Whistler (who had
been at Pembroke college, Oxford, with Graves and Shenstone),
and Sanderson Miller, antiquary and architect, the builder of the
tower on Edge-hill commemorated by Jago in his poem. Nearly
all of these wrote good letters, which were published, and most
of them at least dabbled in literature also, in light verse or easy
prose. And all were more or less in the net of the omnivorous
publisher Robert Dodsley, who did a great deal to make Shenstone
and the Leasowes famous1.
Of Somerville”, a scholar and a gentleman (though his writing
1 As to Robert Dodsley, see ante, vol. ix, pp. 190—1 et al.
? This spelling has been continued in the present chapter for the sake of uni-
formity. The name was, however, always spelt Somervile in the autograph letters
of its owner and in his works printed in his lifetime.


## p. 272 (#298) ############################################

272
Letter-Writers
does not always suggest it) some account has already been given
in an earlier chapter': his prose, in prefaces and letters, many of
the latter still unpublished, is of the good, sonorous, somewhat
pedantic kind which was beginning, even when he wrote, to be
old-fashioned. Another country gentleman was Anthony Whistler
of Whitchurch, an Eton boy, who imbibed 'such a dislike to
learning languages that he could not read the Classics, but no one
formed a better judgment of them,' and was 'a young man of
great delicacy of sentiment. As an undergraduate, he published
anonymously, in 1736, a poem entitled The Shuttlecock. He died
in 1754, aged forty. For many years he had corresponded with
Shenstone and Graves, and, on his death, the former wrote to
the latter "the triumvirate which was the greatest happiness and
the greatest pride of my life is broken. ” Few of their letters,
unfortunately, are preserved. Through Sanderson Miller, the
squire of Radway at the foot of Edge-hill and the friend of all
the noble builders and gardeners of the age (except Horace
Walpole who rarely lost an opportunity of laughing at him), the
Warwickshire coterie had links at once with the great world and
with the greatest writer of the age. It was in his drawing-room
that Fielding read the manuscript of Tom Jones to an admiring
circle of ladies and gentlemen ; and for an improvement which
Pitt generously designed in his garden Miller happily thanked
The Paymaster, well skilled in planting,
Pleased to assist when cash was wanting,
He bid my Laurels grow: they grew
Fast as his Laurels always do.
It was no doubt as a refuge from domestic unhappiness that
Lady Luxborough turned to literature and sought the friendship
of lesser poets. Born about 1700, she was half-sister of Henry St
John, afterwards viscount Bolingbroke, to whom she was all her
life devotedly attached? . In 1727, she married Robert Knight, son
of the cashier of the South Sea company, whom Horace Walpole
contemptuously calls a 'transport. ' About nine years later, she
was separated from her husband in consequence of some scandal
which has never been verified. Horace Walpole, who disliked her
and her friends, speaks of a 'gallantry' in which Dalton, tutor to
the son of Lady Hertford (afterwards duchess of Somerset) was
concerned; but this is unlikely, for the friendship of the two ladies
See chap. v, pp. 109 ff. ante. As to Jago, see ibid. pp. 112-113. As to Shenstone,
see chap. VII, pp. 149 ff. , ante.
2 Cf, ante, vol. IX, p. 217 and note.