Walpole was
attacked
in no.
Cambridge History of English Literature - 1908 - v10
His letters were, indeed, the chief
work of his life.
As the beauty of the art largely depends on the spontaneity of
the writers in the expression of their natural feelings, it would be
futile to attempt to decide the relative merits of the great letter-
writers in order to award the palm to the foremost or greatest of
the class. We should be grateful for the treasures bequeathed to
us and refrain from appraising their respective deserts. To weigh
the golden words of such gracious spirits as Gray, Cowper or
Charles Lamb, in order to decide which of them possesses the
highest value, seems a labour unworthy of them all. Sincerity is
the primary claim upon our respect and esteem for great writers
of letters; and the lack of this rules out the letters of Pope from
the place in literature to which they would otherwise be entitled.
Now, in spite of the cruel criticism of Macaulay, we have no hesita-
tion in claiming sincerity as a characteristic of Walpole's letters.
Walpole lives now and always will live in public esteem as a
great letter-writer; but he was also himself a distinguished figure
during his lifetime. Thus, his name attained to a fame which,
in later years, has been considerably dimmed, partly by the
instability which reflects itself in his writings, and, also, by the
virulent censure to which he has been subjected by some critics of
## p. 243 (#269) ############################################
6
6
Horace Walpole as a Man 243
distinction. Macaulay's complete indictment of Horace Walpole as
a man has left him with scarcely a rag of character. The charges
brought against him are, however, so wholesale that the condem-
nation may be said to carry with it its own antidote; for it is not
a mere caricature, but one almost entirely opposed to truth. To
many of these unjust charges, any candid review of Walpole's
career in its many aspects, exhibiting him as a man of quality, a
brilliant wit, both in conversation and in writing, an author of
considerable mark, a connoisseur of distinction and a generous
and ready friend, will form a sufficient answer. A fuller reply, how-
ever, is required to those accusations which touch his honour and
social conduct through life. Macaulay speaks of Walpole's 'faults
of head and heart,' of his 'unhealthy and disorganised mind,' of
his disguise from the world ‘by mask upon mask, adding that
whatever was little seemed great to him, and whatever was great
seemed to him little. ' Now, Walpole placed himself so often at
,
his reader's mercy, and, occasionally, was so perverse in his actions
as to make it necessary for those who admire his character to show
that, though he had many transparent faults, his life was guided
by honourable principles, and that, though not willing to stand
forth as a censor of mankind, he could clearly distinguish between
the great and little things of life and, when a duty was clear to
him, bad strength to follow the call. His affectation no one would
wish to deny; but, although this is an objectionable quality, it
can scarcely be treated as criminal. In fact, Walpole began life
with youthful enthusiasm and with an eager love of friends, but
soon adopted a shield of fine-gentlemanly pretence, in order to
protect his own feelings.
Horatio Walpole was born at the house of his father (Sir Robert
Walpole) in Arlington street, on 24 September 1717. After two
years of study with a tutor, he went to Eton in April 1727, where
he remained until the spring of 1735, when he entered at King's
college, Cambridge. He had many fast Etonian friends, and we hear
of two small circles -- the triumvirate,' consisting of George and
Charles Montagu and Walpole, and 'the quadruple alliance,' namely,
Gray, West, Ashton and Walpole? He left the university in 1739,
and, on 10 March, set off on the grand tour with Gray, of which
some account has already been given in this volume? Of the
quarrel between them, Walpole took the whole blame upon him-
self; but, probably, Gray was also at fault. Both kept silence
as to the cause, and the only authentic particulars are to be
1 Cf. chap. vi, p. 117, ante.
Cf. ibid. pp. 118-119.
16-2
## p. 244 (#270) ############################################
244
Letter-Writers
found in Walpole's letter to Mason, who was then writing the
life of Gray—a letter which does the greatest credit to Walpole's
heart. The friendship was renewed after three years and continued
through life ; but it was not what it had been at first, though
Walpole's appreciation of the genius of Gray was always of the
strongest and of the most enthusiastic character.
After Gray left Walpole at Reggio, the latter passed through a
serious illness. His life was probably saved by the prompt action
of Joseph Spence (who was travelling with Lord Lincoln), in
summoning a famous Italian physician who, with the aid of Spence's
own attentive nursing, brought the illness to a successful end.
Walpole, when convalescent, continued his journey with Lord
Lincoln and Spence; but, having been elected member of parlia-
ment for Callington in Cornwall at the general election, he left his
companions and landed at Dover, 12 September 1741. He changed
his seat several times, but continued in parliament until 1768, when
he retired from the representation of Lynn. He was observant of his
duties, and a regular attendant at long sittings, his descriptions of
which are of great interest. On 23 March 1742, he spoke for the first
time in the House, against the motion for the appointment of a
secret committee on his father. According to his own account,
his speech ‘was published in the Magazines, but was entirely false,
and had not one paragraph of my real speech in it. ' On 11 January
1751, he moved the address to the king at the opening of the
session ; but the most remarkable incident in his parliamentary
career was his quarrel, in 1747, with the redoubtable speaker
Onslow. More to his credit were his strenuous endeavours to
save the life of the unfortunate admiral Byng.
The turning-point of his life was the acquisition of Strawberry
hill. The building of the house, the planning of the gardens and
the collection of his miscellaneous artistic curiosities soon became
of absorbing interest to Walpole. Much might be said of him as
a connoisseur; his taste has been strongly condemned; but,
although he often made much of what was not of great importance,
he gradually collected works of enduring value, and the disper-
sion of his property in 1842 came to be regarded as a historical
event? . Judge Hardinge was just when he wrote: 'In his taste for
architecture and vertu there were both whims and foppery, but
still with fancy and genius. The opening of the private press in
1 2 March 1773.
· The contents of Strawberry hill realised £33,450. 118. 9d. , and would be valued
now at many times that amount.
3 Nichols's Literary Anecdotes, vol. VIII, p. 525.
6
## p. 245 (#271) ############################################
Strawberry Hill and its Press
245
1757, the Officina Arbuteana or the Elzevirianum, as he called
it, also, gave Walpole, with much additional work, a great deal of
pleasure. He was enabled to print his light verses and present
them to his distinguished visitors, and could make preparations
for the printing of his projected works. Conway called his cousin
' Elzevir Horace. ' Walpole was very proud to be able to begin the
work of his press by printing two unpublished odes by Gray'.
Walpole’s head was so full of Strawberry hill, and he mentioned
it so frequently in his letters, that he sent a particular description
to Mann (12 June 1753) with a drawing by Richard Bentley, 'for
it is uncomfortable in so intimate a correspondence as ours not
to be exactly master of every spot where one another is writing
reading or sauntering. He frequently produced guides to the
*Castle'; but the fullest and final one is the Description of the
Villa printed in 1784, and illustrated by many interesting plates.
Walpole was very generous in allowing visitors to see his house ;
but these visitors were often very inconsiderate, and broke the rules
he made. He wrote to George Montagu (3 September 1763):
6
My house is full of people and has been so from the instant I breakfasted,
and more are coming-in short I keep an inn: the sign “The Gothic Castle. '
Since my gallery was finished I have not been in it a quarter of an hour
together; my whole time is passed in giving tickets for seeing it and hiding
myself while it is seen.
In December 1791, Horace Walpole succeeded his nephew as
earl of Orford. The prodigality, and then the madness, of the
third earl forced his uncle to take upon himself the duties of a man
of business, in order to keep the estate from dissolution. He had
to undertake the management of the family estate, because there
was no one else inclined to act. When he had put things into
a better state, the earl's sudden return to sanity threw everything
into confusion again, as he was surrounded by a gang of sharpers.
Horace Walpole developed unexpected business qualities, and,
6
1 They were published by Dodsley, out of whose hands the MS was 'snatched' by
Walpole, in the presence of Gray. Several works of interest were printed at the press,
such as Hentzner's Journey into England (a charming little book), Mémoires de
Grammont, The Life of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, etc. , and several of Walpole's own
works. A bibliography of the Strawberry hill books is given by Austin Dobson as
an appendix to his Horace Walpole, a Memoir. The output of the press was highly
satisfactory, considering that the whole staff consisted of a man and a boy. In a
letter to Sir David Dalrymple (23 February 1764), Walpole makes some peevish
remarks about his press: •The plague I have had in every shape with my own
printers, engravers, the booksellers, etc. , besides my own trouble, have almost
discouraged me from what I took up at first as an amusement, but which has produced
very little of it. '
## p. 246 (#272) ############################################
246
Letter-Writers
He was
according to his own account, was able to reduce the mismanaged
estate to order and solvency.
In April 1777, the nephew went mad again ; and, on his re-
covery, in 1778, the uncle gave up the care of him.
subjected to continual anxiety during the remainder of his
nephew's life; but he did not again take charge of the estate.
When he himself came into the property, there was little left
to manage. The picture gallery at Houghton, which Horace
greatly loved, was sold to the empress Catharine II of Russia ;
and, before Lord Orford died, in December 1791, he had become
practically bankrupt. Horace Walpole had thus to take up an
earldom which had fallen on evil days. He was not likely, in
his old age, to accept with pleasure a title whose credit he could
not hope to retrieve. He refused to enter the House of Lords ;
but, however much he might wish to do so, he could not relieve
himself of the title? . He died on 2 March 1797, at the house in
Berkeley square to which he had moved from Arlington street.
A rapid glance through Walpole's correspondence will soon
reveal to us the secret of his life, which explains much for which
he has been condemned. The moving principle of his conduct
through life was love for, and pride in, his father. It is well,
therefore, to insist upon the serious purpose of much of Horace's
career, and to call to mind how signally his outlook upon affairs
was influenced by the proceedings of his family. He was proud
of its antiquity and of its history from the conquest downwards ;
but he knew that no man of mark had emerged from it until his
father came to do honour to his race; so, with that father, the
pride of his son began and ended. Sir Robert Walpole's enemies
were his son's, and those of the family who disgraced their name
were obnoxious to him in consequence. In a time of great laxity,
Margaret, countess of Orford, wife of the second earl, became
specially notorious, and the disgracefulness of her conduct was
a constant source of disgust to him. His elder brother Robert,
the second earl, was little of a friend, and mention has already
been made of the misconduct of his nephew George, the third
earl (who succeeded to the title in 1751 and held it for forty
years).
a
1 There is some misapprehension as to this. Within a few days of the death of his
nephew, Walpole subscribed a letter to the duke of Bedford — The Uncle of the late
Earl of Orford'; but he did not refuse to sign himself 'Orford,' although Pinkerton
printed in Walpoliana a letter dated 26 December 1791, signed • Hor. Walpole'—but
this was an answer to a letter of congratulation from Pinkerton himself on the
succession, the advantages of which Walpole denied.
9
## p. 247 (#273) ############################################
a
Walpole's Correspondence 247
The public came slowly into possession of Walpole's great
literary bequest. A series of Miscellaneous Letters was published
in 1778 as the fifth volume of the collected edition of his Works. In
1818, Letters to George Montagu followed, and, in subsequent
years, other series appeared. The first collected edition of
1
Private Correspondence was published in 1820, and a fuller edition
in 1840. But the reading world had to wait until 1857 for a fairly
complete edition of the letters arranged in chronological order.
This, edited in nine volumes by Peter Cunningham with valuable
notes, held its own as the standard edition, until Mrs Paget
Toynbee's largely augmented edition appeared. The supply of
Walpole's letters seems to be well-nigh inexhaustible, and a still
fuller collection will, probably, appear in its turn.
We have here a body of important material which forms both
an autobiography and a full history of sixty years of the eighteenth
century. Although the letters contain Walpole's opinions on events
as they occurred day by day, he communicated them to his different
correspondents from varied points of view. It is a remarkable
fact, which proves the orderly and constructive character of the
writer's mind, that the entire collection of the letters, ranging over
a very long period, forms a well connected whole, with all the
appearance of having been systematically planned.
The first letter we possess is to ‘My dearest Charles' (C.
Lyttelton), and was written when Walpole was fifteen years of age
(7 August 1732). In it he says:
I can reflect with great joy on the moments we passed together at Eton,
and long to talk 'em over, as I think we could recollect a thousand passages
which were something above the common rate of schoolboy's diversions.
In the last known letter from his hand, written to the countess of
Upper Ossory, to protest against her showing his ‘idle notes' to
others, Walpole refers to his fourscore nephews and nieces of
various ages, who are brought to him about once a year to stare
at him 'as the Methusalem of the family. He wants no laurels :
I shall be quite content with a sprig of rosemary thrown after me, when
the parson of the parish commits my dust to dust. Till then pray Madam
accept the resignation of your ancient servant, Orford.
The same spirit runs through the entire correspondence. It
constantly displays his affectionate feelings towards his friends and
the lightness with which he is able to touch on his own misfortunes.
Throughout his life, he was troubled by 'invalidity’; yet he could
repudiate any claim to patience, and ask Mann (8 January 1786)
1 See bibliography.
2 16 January 1797.
6
## p. 248 (#274) ############################################
248
Letter-Writers
6
if people of easy fortunes cannot bear illness with temper what are the poor
to do, who have none of our alleviations? The affluent, I fear, do not consider
what a benefit ticket has fallen to their lot, out of millions not so fortunate;
yet less do they reflect that chance, not merit, drew the prize out of the
wheel.
He suffered from gout throughout his life; but he always made
light of the affliction. He told Mason (Christmas day 1779) that
he had had a relapse, though a slight one, and 'called it only a
codicil to my gout. Mr Gibbon said “very well ; but I fancy it is
not in consequence of your will. ” There was no mistake about
the reality of his attacks; for chalk-stones were continually
breaking out from his fingers, and he told Lady Ossory that, if he
could not wait upon her, he hoped she would have the charity 'to
come and visit the chalk-pits in Berkeley Square. '
Walpole studied letter-writing as an art and understood its
distinctive features. There is no violent change in his style from
beginning to end of his correspondence ; but a gradual growth
may be observed in his artistic treatment of his matter. He could
criticise other letter-writers with judgment and good taste; but
there was one, above all, who was only to be worshipped, and that
was Madame de Sévigné. He tells Richard Bentley that
?
My Lady Hervey has made me most happy by bringing me from Paris an
admirable copy of the very portrait (of Mme de Sévigné] that was Madame
de Simiane's (her granddaughter). I am going to build an altar for it, under
the title of Notre Dame des Rochers!
Walpole addresses the same Lady Hervey from Paris (8 October
1765) to the effect that he had called upon Madame Chabot.
She was not at home, but the Hotel de Carnavalet was; and I stopped on
purpose to say an Ave Maria before it. It is a very singular building, not
at all in the French style, and looks like an ex voto raised to her honour by
some of her votaries (Mme de Sévigné's]. I don't think her honoured half
enough in her own country? .
Mrs Toynbee's edition contains a total of three thousand and
sixty-one letters, addressed by Walpole to one hundred and sixty
1 24 December 1754.
? This interesting old house is now well known as the home of the Carnavalet
Eleven years after this, Madame Du Deffand hoaxed Walpole by sending
him a snuffbox with a portrait of Mme de Sévigné copied from one he greatly admired.
This was sent with a letter signed · Rabutin de Sévigné' and beginning thus: 'Je
connois votre folle passion pour moi ; votre enthousiasme pour mes lettres, votre vénération
pour les lieus que j'ai habités. ' In acknowledging the gift from judge Hardinge of
four drawings of the château de Grignan, in a letter dated 4 July 1779, Walpole
wrote: 'I own that Grignan is grander, and in a much finer situation than I had
imagined ; as I concluded the witchery of Madame de Sévigné's ideas and style had
spread the same leaf-gold over places with which she gilded her friends. ' (See Nichols's
Literary Anecdotes, vol. VIII, p. 526. )
museum,
## p. 249 (#275) ############################################
His Chief Correspondents 249
correspondents, many of them men and women of mark. The
number of letters to some of these personages are very few, but
among them are seven, to each of whom over one hundred letters
were written by him. Sir Horace Mann heads the list with 820,
then comes the countess of Upper Ossory with 400. The other
five have smaller numbers, as George Montagu 263, William
Mason 217, William Cole 180, Henry Conway 179 and Mary
Berry 159. The lifelong correspondence with Mann exhibits a
unique instance of friendship, maintained without personal inter-
course for forty-five years. Walpole might well say to his friend
(4 December 1785), “You and I have long out-friendshipped Orestes
and Pylades. '
Mann was an early friend of Walpole, and his appointment in
1737 as assistant to Charles Fane (afterwards second viscount
Fane), envoy extraordinary at the court of Florence, by Sir Robert
Walpole, was entirely owing to this intimacy. In 1740, Mann be-
came Fane's successor, and Walpole visited him at Florence in the
same year. After returning to England in September 1741, Walpole
never saw his friend again. Mann never left Italy, although, in
1755, he succeeded his elder brother in the possession of the
family estate at Linton, Kent. His chief duties were to look after
the two 'pretenders' and to entertain distinguished English
travellers in Italy. He was kept informed by Walpole of all that
was going on in England, and he returned the favour by writing
continuously in reply, though, it must be said, giving Walpole lead
in return for his gold? It should, however, not be overlooked,
that, when writing to Mann and other friends abroad, Walpole
always feared the opening of his letters at the post office. He
complains to the earl of Hertford? :
As my letters are seldom proper for the post now I begin them at any time,
and am forced to trust to chance for a conveyance. This difficulty renders
my news very stale.
Walpole, writing to Lady Ossorys, praised women as far better
letter-writers than men. When he wrote 'I could lay down as an
infallible truth in the words of my god-father, Pennis non homini
datis, the English of which is, “It was not given to man to write
letters," it is just possible that it occurred to him how the dictum
might apply to his friend Mann. Some of Walpole's best letters
1 Peter Cunningham described Mann's letters as utterly unreadable. ' A selection
of them was published by Doran in 1876, under the irritating title Mann and Manners
at the Court of Florence.
3 3 August 1764.
3 Christmas day 1773.
6
"
## p. 250 (#276) ############################################
250
Letter-Writers
were addressed to his frequent correspondent Lady Ossory. Mary
Berry would have stood higher in the numerical list; but Walpole
did not become intimate with her and her father and sister until
late in his life in the winter of 1788). Madame Du Deffand's
letters to Walpole were first printed by Miss Berry and afterwards
reprinted in Paris? A complete edition of these letters, edited
.
by the late Mrs Toynbee, was published in 1912. Walpole's letters
to Madame Du Deffand were burnt at his particular request. It
is supposed that he did not wish them to be published, lest his
French should be criticised. He wrote to Mason? : 'Mme Du
Deffand has told me that I speak French worse than any English-
man she knows. ' A little too much has been made of Walpole's
gallicisms, although there certainly is a remarkable one in the
preface to Historic Doubts on Richard III :
It is almost a question whether if the dead of past ages could revive, they
would be able to reconnoitre3 the events of their own times as transmitted
to us.
Thomas Pitt, first Lord Camelford (nephew of the great Chatham),
writing to judge Hardinge in 1789, refers to the translation of
Walpole's Essay on Gardening by the duc de Nivernais :
I shall be glad to see the work of M. de Nivernois, if it answers at all to
the specimens you have sent me. The truth is that, as Mr Horace Walpole
always thinks in French he ought never to write in English; and I dare be
sworn Nivernois' translation will appear the more original work of the two4.
Did Hannah More venture to ‘chaff' Walpole when she sent him
anonymously a clever letter dated' Alamode Castle, June 20, 1840'
and headed it ‘A Specimen of the English language, as it will be
written and spoken in the next century. In a letter from a lady
to her friend in the reign of George V'? Walpole acknowledged
this letter (5 April 1785) with cordiality and much praise, to show
that ‘his withers were unwrung. Walpole expressed to Lady
'
Ossory (Christmas day 1781) his opinion that 'Letters ought to be
nothing but extempore conversation upon paper,' and, doubtless,
his conversation was much like his letters, and as excellent. His
wit was ready and brilliant in both forms of communication. He
was himself proud of the witty apophthegm which he seems to
have first imparted to Mann by word of mouth :
Recollect what I have said to you, that this world is a comedy to those
who think, a tragedy to those who feel. This is the quintessence of all I
have learnt in fifty years5!
1 See bibliography.
2 5 July 1773.
3 This use of the word 'reconnoitre’ in English was quite obsolete in Walpole's day.
Nichols's Literary Illustrations, vol. vii, p. 118. 5 5 March 1772.
5
## p. 251 (#277) ############################################
His Experiences and Anecdotes 251
At any rate, the saying has found its way into books of familiar
quotations.
Numerous instances might be given of the value of the letters
in illustration of history; but, in spite of the popular notion as to
the frivolity of a large part of their contents, it may safely be said
that matters of moment are dealt with throughout the series, and
sidelights are to be found on every page. There is, first, the
Jacobite rising of 1745. Then, we have the trials of the Jacobites,
and, for a time, there is peace, broken by the excitement of
Wilkes's publication of The North Briton and subsequent riots.
Walpole was attacked in no. 2 of The North Briton; and Wilkes
was annoyed that he did not seem to mind the attack. In a letter
to Mann? , Walpole laments the state of the nation, and, after
giving instances of the grievous increase of gambling, he writes
'We are not a great age, but surely we are tending to some
great revolution. The American war was the next great event
to supply Walpole with material for invective and complaints of
bad government. At the end of his life came the great con-
vulsion of the French revolution and, in September 1789, he
congratulated Hannah More on the demolition of the Bastille,
the reform of which he related fourteen years before? The
enormities of the revolutionaries changed his political views, as
they did those of the majority of Englishmen, and he welcomed
with enthusiasm Burke's Reflections. He said that it painted the
queen 'exactly as she appeared to me the first time I saw her
when Dauphiness 3. '
Many of Walpole's anecdotes are valuable as illustrations of
the manners of the time and contain information not to be found
elsewhere; but the chief interest of his correspondence remains
autobiographical. The first hundred pages of Mrs Toynbee's
edition contain letters, from 1732 to 1741, to Charles Lyttelton,
Gray, West, George Montagu, Thomas Ashton and Henry Conway,
for the most part written during Walpole's travels. The first letter
to Mann was written on 11 September 1741. From this time, the
complete autobiography may be said to begin, and it continues to
the end. Walpole wrote an interesting advertisement prefixed to
the Letters to Mann, explaining his reasons for preserving them,
which is too long to quote here, but will be found in a note to the
first letter. For the incidents of his early life we must search
1 2 February 1770.
2 25 October 1775.
3 See, also, his anecdote of Marie-Antoinette as queen, in his letter to Mary Berry,
3 July 1790.
## p. 252 (#278) ############################################
252
Letter-Writers
elsewhere, and he has left us the main particulars in the Short
Notes of My Life.
Walpole's character may be easily understood by anyone who
studies his correspondence. In early life, he was not very different
from a large number of the highbred men of the eighteenth century
who took pride in their social position, for it is necessary to
remember that there were two classes of men in the English society
of this age-the jovial and the coarse, and the reserved and
refined. Sir Robert Walpole belonged to the former, and his son
Horace to the latter. Horace was never very young, and his
father said of himself that he was the younger of the two. Horace
adds 1: 'Indeed I think so in spite of his forty years more. ' The
son began life with a character for frankness and enthusiasm; but,
as he grew into the cynical man of the world, he became colder in
manner to mere acquaintances, reserving his true self only for his
bosom friends. He cultivated an extreme fastidiousness and severe
refinement, which caused him to exhibit a distaste for a robust
humour that he considered vulgar. This powerful prejudice caused
him to propound much absurd criticism. He could not admire
Fielding because he kept 'low company, and condemned the
'vulgarity of his character. ' For the beautiful and pathetic
Voyage to Lisbon he could find no praise, and he refers to
'Fielding's Travels or rather an account of how his dropsy was
treated,' and how he was teased by an innkeeper's wife in the Isle
of Wight? He could not appreciate the genius of Richardson and
refers to
those tedious lamentations - Clarissa, and Sir Charles Grandison, which are
pictures of high life as conceived by a bookseller, and romances as they would
be spiritualised by a Methodist preacher.
Sterne was no more fortunate in obtaining the good opinion of
Walpole, who writes to Henry Zouch :
The second and third volumes of Tristram Shandy, the dregs of nonsense,
have universally met the contempt they deserve: genius may be exhausted ;-
I see that folly's invention may be so too4.
He could appreciate Johnson's great qualities; but he was repelled
by his roughness. He said wittily :
Johnson made the most brutal speeches to living persons, for though he
was goodnatured at bottom he was very ill-natured at top.
In considering Walpole's affected remarks on his own literary
character, we should bear in mind the expressed opinions of so
| 22 January 1742.
2 27 March 1755.
3 20 December 1760.
4 7 March 1761.
## p. 253 (#279) ############################################
Walpole's Earlier Works
253
aristocratic an author as Byron, at a much later date. Walpole
thought it would disgrace him to be known as a learned author,
although, in his heart, he was proud of his books. He discloses his
true character with a fine instinct more frequently when writing
to Mann than to any other correspondent. At a quite early date,
he takes Mann to task for over-estimating his abilities.
I must answer for your brother a paragraph that he showed me in one of
your letters 'Mr W's letters are full of wit; don't they adore them in Eng-
land? ' Not at all--and I don't wonder at them; for if I have any wit in my
letters, which I do not at all take for granted, it is ten to one I have none out of
my letters. . . . Then as to adoring; you now see only my letters, and you may be
sure I take care not to write you word of any of my bad qualities, which other
people must see in the gross; and that may be a great hindrance to their
adoration. Oh! there are a thousand other reasons I could give you, why I
am not the least in fashion. I came over in an ill season: it is a million to
one that nobody thinks a declining old minister's son has wit. At any time
men in opposition have always most; but now it would be absurd for a courtier
to have even common sensel.
The history of the growth of Walpole's works is fully detailed
in the Correspondence; and, apparently, nearly all his books were
written at high pressure. He particularly notes how long a time
was occupied in their production. He was a dabbler in literature
from his early life. He wrote, in 1742, a sermon on painting for
the amusement of his father, which was afterwards published in
Ædes Walpoliance, and he was continually writing occasional
verses, a practice in which he persevered when he possessed a
private printing-press. It was not, however, until 1753 that he
may be said to have begun his literary career with the writing
of some clever papers in The World, a periodical written by men
of fashion for men of fashion. His first substantive work was
A Catalogue of the Royal and Noble Authors of England, printed
at the Strawberry hill press in 1758. It is of no great value as a
bibliography, but, dealing as it does with a distinctive subject, is
of occasional use as well as of some interest. The next work,
Anecdotes of Painting in England, also printed at the Strawberry
hill press, in 1762, is the only one of Walpole's works which has
really held its position. It was reprinted several times by its
author and twice reedited. The publication originated in the
purchase of Vertue's valuable collections from his widow in
1756. 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.
work of his life.
As the beauty of the art largely depends on the spontaneity of
the writers in the expression of their natural feelings, it would be
futile to attempt to decide the relative merits of the great letter-
writers in order to award the palm to the foremost or greatest of
the class. We should be grateful for the treasures bequeathed to
us and refrain from appraising their respective deserts. To weigh
the golden words of such gracious spirits as Gray, Cowper or
Charles Lamb, in order to decide which of them possesses the
highest value, seems a labour unworthy of them all. Sincerity is
the primary claim upon our respect and esteem for great writers
of letters; and the lack of this rules out the letters of Pope from
the place in literature to which they would otherwise be entitled.
Now, in spite of the cruel criticism of Macaulay, we have no hesita-
tion in claiming sincerity as a characteristic of Walpole's letters.
Walpole lives now and always will live in public esteem as a
great letter-writer; but he was also himself a distinguished figure
during his lifetime. Thus, his name attained to a fame which,
in later years, has been considerably dimmed, partly by the
instability which reflects itself in his writings, and, also, by the
virulent censure to which he has been subjected by some critics of
## p. 243 (#269) ############################################
6
6
Horace Walpole as a Man 243
distinction. Macaulay's complete indictment of Horace Walpole as
a man has left him with scarcely a rag of character. The charges
brought against him are, however, so wholesale that the condem-
nation may be said to carry with it its own antidote; for it is not
a mere caricature, but one almost entirely opposed to truth. To
many of these unjust charges, any candid review of Walpole's
career in its many aspects, exhibiting him as a man of quality, a
brilliant wit, both in conversation and in writing, an author of
considerable mark, a connoisseur of distinction and a generous
and ready friend, will form a sufficient answer. A fuller reply, how-
ever, is required to those accusations which touch his honour and
social conduct through life. Macaulay speaks of Walpole's 'faults
of head and heart,' of his 'unhealthy and disorganised mind,' of
his disguise from the world ‘by mask upon mask, adding that
whatever was little seemed great to him, and whatever was great
seemed to him little. ' Now, Walpole placed himself so often at
,
his reader's mercy, and, occasionally, was so perverse in his actions
as to make it necessary for those who admire his character to show
that, though he had many transparent faults, his life was guided
by honourable principles, and that, though not willing to stand
forth as a censor of mankind, he could clearly distinguish between
the great and little things of life and, when a duty was clear to
him, bad strength to follow the call. His affectation no one would
wish to deny; but, although this is an objectionable quality, it
can scarcely be treated as criminal. In fact, Walpole began life
with youthful enthusiasm and with an eager love of friends, but
soon adopted a shield of fine-gentlemanly pretence, in order to
protect his own feelings.
Horatio Walpole was born at the house of his father (Sir Robert
Walpole) in Arlington street, on 24 September 1717. After two
years of study with a tutor, he went to Eton in April 1727, where
he remained until the spring of 1735, when he entered at King's
college, Cambridge. He had many fast Etonian friends, and we hear
of two small circles -- the triumvirate,' consisting of George and
Charles Montagu and Walpole, and 'the quadruple alliance,' namely,
Gray, West, Ashton and Walpole? He left the university in 1739,
and, on 10 March, set off on the grand tour with Gray, of which
some account has already been given in this volume? Of the
quarrel between them, Walpole took the whole blame upon him-
self; but, probably, Gray was also at fault. Both kept silence
as to the cause, and the only authentic particulars are to be
1 Cf. chap. vi, p. 117, ante.
Cf. ibid. pp. 118-119.
16-2
## p. 244 (#270) ############################################
244
Letter-Writers
found in Walpole's letter to Mason, who was then writing the
life of Gray—a letter which does the greatest credit to Walpole's
heart. The friendship was renewed after three years and continued
through life ; but it was not what it had been at first, though
Walpole's appreciation of the genius of Gray was always of the
strongest and of the most enthusiastic character.
After Gray left Walpole at Reggio, the latter passed through a
serious illness. His life was probably saved by the prompt action
of Joseph Spence (who was travelling with Lord Lincoln), in
summoning a famous Italian physician who, with the aid of Spence's
own attentive nursing, brought the illness to a successful end.
Walpole, when convalescent, continued his journey with Lord
Lincoln and Spence; but, having been elected member of parlia-
ment for Callington in Cornwall at the general election, he left his
companions and landed at Dover, 12 September 1741. He changed
his seat several times, but continued in parliament until 1768, when
he retired from the representation of Lynn. He was observant of his
duties, and a regular attendant at long sittings, his descriptions of
which are of great interest. On 23 March 1742, he spoke for the first
time in the House, against the motion for the appointment of a
secret committee on his father. According to his own account,
his speech ‘was published in the Magazines, but was entirely false,
and had not one paragraph of my real speech in it. ' On 11 January
1751, he moved the address to the king at the opening of the
session ; but the most remarkable incident in his parliamentary
career was his quarrel, in 1747, with the redoubtable speaker
Onslow. More to his credit were his strenuous endeavours to
save the life of the unfortunate admiral Byng.
The turning-point of his life was the acquisition of Strawberry
hill. The building of the house, the planning of the gardens and
the collection of his miscellaneous artistic curiosities soon became
of absorbing interest to Walpole. Much might be said of him as
a connoisseur; his taste has been strongly condemned; but,
although he often made much of what was not of great importance,
he gradually collected works of enduring value, and the disper-
sion of his property in 1842 came to be regarded as a historical
event? . Judge Hardinge was just when he wrote: 'In his taste for
architecture and vertu there were both whims and foppery, but
still with fancy and genius. The opening of the private press in
1 2 March 1773.
· The contents of Strawberry hill realised £33,450. 118. 9d. , and would be valued
now at many times that amount.
3 Nichols's Literary Anecdotes, vol. VIII, p. 525.
6
## p. 245 (#271) ############################################
Strawberry Hill and its Press
245
1757, the Officina Arbuteana or the Elzevirianum, as he called
it, also, gave Walpole, with much additional work, a great deal of
pleasure. He was enabled to print his light verses and present
them to his distinguished visitors, and could make preparations
for the printing of his projected works. Conway called his cousin
' Elzevir Horace. ' Walpole was very proud to be able to begin the
work of his press by printing two unpublished odes by Gray'.
Walpole’s head was so full of Strawberry hill, and he mentioned
it so frequently in his letters, that he sent a particular description
to Mann (12 June 1753) with a drawing by Richard Bentley, 'for
it is uncomfortable in so intimate a correspondence as ours not
to be exactly master of every spot where one another is writing
reading or sauntering. He frequently produced guides to the
*Castle'; but the fullest and final one is the Description of the
Villa printed in 1784, and illustrated by many interesting plates.
Walpole was very generous in allowing visitors to see his house ;
but these visitors were often very inconsiderate, and broke the rules
he made. He wrote to George Montagu (3 September 1763):
6
My house is full of people and has been so from the instant I breakfasted,
and more are coming-in short I keep an inn: the sign “The Gothic Castle. '
Since my gallery was finished I have not been in it a quarter of an hour
together; my whole time is passed in giving tickets for seeing it and hiding
myself while it is seen.
In December 1791, Horace Walpole succeeded his nephew as
earl of Orford. The prodigality, and then the madness, of the
third earl forced his uncle to take upon himself the duties of a man
of business, in order to keep the estate from dissolution. He had
to undertake the management of the family estate, because there
was no one else inclined to act. When he had put things into
a better state, the earl's sudden return to sanity threw everything
into confusion again, as he was surrounded by a gang of sharpers.
Horace Walpole developed unexpected business qualities, and,
6
1 They were published by Dodsley, out of whose hands the MS was 'snatched' by
Walpole, in the presence of Gray. Several works of interest were printed at the press,
such as Hentzner's Journey into England (a charming little book), Mémoires de
Grammont, The Life of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, etc. , and several of Walpole's own
works. A bibliography of the Strawberry hill books is given by Austin Dobson as
an appendix to his Horace Walpole, a Memoir. The output of the press was highly
satisfactory, considering that the whole staff consisted of a man and a boy. In a
letter to Sir David Dalrymple (23 February 1764), Walpole makes some peevish
remarks about his press: •The plague I have had in every shape with my own
printers, engravers, the booksellers, etc. , besides my own trouble, have almost
discouraged me from what I took up at first as an amusement, but which has produced
very little of it. '
## p. 246 (#272) ############################################
246
Letter-Writers
He was
according to his own account, was able to reduce the mismanaged
estate to order and solvency.
In April 1777, the nephew went mad again ; and, on his re-
covery, in 1778, the uncle gave up the care of him.
subjected to continual anxiety during the remainder of his
nephew's life; but he did not again take charge of the estate.
When he himself came into the property, there was little left
to manage. The picture gallery at Houghton, which Horace
greatly loved, was sold to the empress Catharine II of Russia ;
and, before Lord Orford died, in December 1791, he had become
practically bankrupt. Horace Walpole had thus to take up an
earldom which had fallen on evil days. He was not likely, in
his old age, to accept with pleasure a title whose credit he could
not hope to retrieve. He refused to enter the House of Lords ;
but, however much he might wish to do so, he could not relieve
himself of the title? . He died on 2 March 1797, at the house in
Berkeley square to which he had moved from Arlington street.
A rapid glance through Walpole's correspondence will soon
reveal to us the secret of his life, which explains much for which
he has been condemned. The moving principle of his conduct
through life was love for, and pride in, his father. It is well,
therefore, to insist upon the serious purpose of much of Horace's
career, and to call to mind how signally his outlook upon affairs
was influenced by the proceedings of his family. He was proud
of its antiquity and of its history from the conquest downwards ;
but he knew that no man of mark had emerged from it until his
father came to do honour to his race; so, with that father, the
pride of his son began and ended. Sir Robert Walpole's enemies
were his son's, and those of the family who disgraced their name
were obnoxious to him in consequence. In a time of great laxity,
Margaret, countess of Orford, wife of the second earl, became
specially notorious, and the disgracefulness of her conduct was
a constant source of disgust to him. His elder brother Robert,
the second earl, was little of a friend, and mention has already
been made of the misconduct of his nephew George, the third
earl (who succeeded to the title in 1751 and held it for forty
years).
a
1 There is some misapprehension as to this. Within a few days of the death of his
nephew, Walpole subscribed a letter to the duke of Bedford — The Uncle of the late
Earl of Orford'; but he did not refuse to sign himself 'Orford,' although Pinkerton
printed in Walpoliana a letter dated 26 December 1791, signed • Hor. Walpole'—but
this was an answer to a letter of congratulation from Pinkerton himself on the
succession, the advantages of which Walpole denied.
9
## p. 247 (#273) ############################################
a
Walpole's Correspondence 247
The public came slowly into possession of Walpole's great
literary bequest. A series of Miscellaneous Letters was published
in 1778 as the fifth volume of the collected edition of his Works. In
1818, Letters to George Montagu followed, and, in subsequent
years, other series appeared. The first collected edition of
1
Private Correspondence was published in 1820, and a fuller edition
in 1840. But the reading world had to wait until 1857 for a fairly
complete edition of the letters arranged in chronological order.
This, edited in nine volumes by Peter Cunningham with valuable
notes, held its own as the standard edition, until Mrs Paget
Toynbee's largely augmented edition appeared. The supply of
Walpole's letters seems to be well-nigh inexhaustible, and a still
fuller collection will, probably, appear in its turn.
We have here a body of important material which forms both
an autobiography and a full history of sixty years of the eighteenth
century. Although the letters contain Walpole's opinions on events
as they occurred day by day, he communicated them to his different
correspondents from varied points of view. It is a remarkable
fact, which proves the orderly and constructive character of the
writer's mind, that the entire collection of the letters, ranging over
a very long period, forms a well connected whole, with all the
appearance of having been systematically planned.
The first letter we possess is to ‘My dearest Charles' (C.
Lyttelton), and was written when Walpole was fifteen years of age
(7 August 1732). In it he says:
I can reflect with great joy on the moments we passed together at Eton,
and long to talk 'em over, as I think we could recollect a thousand passages
which were something above the common rate of schoolboy's diversions.
In the last known letter from his hand, written to the countess of
Upper Ossory, to protest against her showing his ‘idle notes' to
others, Walpole refers to his fourscore nephews and nieces of
various ages, who are brought to him about once a year to stare
at him 'as the Methusalem of the family. He wants no laurels :
I shall be quite content with a sprig of rosemary thrown after me, when
the parson of the parish commits my dust to dust. Till then pray Madam
accept the resignation of your ancient servant, Orford.
The same spirit runs through the entire correspondence. It
constantly displays his affectionate feelings towards his friends and
the lightness with which he is able to touch on his own misfortunes.
Throughout his life, he was troubled by 'invalidity’; yet he could
repudiate any claim to patience, and ask Mann (8 January 1786)
1 See bibliography.
2 16 January 1797.
6
## p. 248 (#274) ############################################
248
Letter-Writers
6
if people of easy fortunes cannot bear illness with temper what are the poor
to do, who have none of our alleviations? The affluent, I fear, do not consider
what a benefit ticket has fallen to their lot, out of millions not so fortunate;
yet less do they reflect that chance, not merit, drew the prize out of the
wheel.
He suffered from gout throughout his life; but he always made
light of the affliction. He told Mason (Christmas day 1779) that
he had had a relapse, though a slight one, and 'called it only a
codicil to my gout. Mr Gibbon said “very well ; but I fancy it is
not in consequence of your will. ” There was no mistake about
the reality of his attacks; for chalk-stones were continually
breaking out from his fingers, and he told Lady Ossory that, if he
could not wait upon her, he hoped she would have the charity 'to
come and visit the chalk-pits in Berkeley Square. '
Walpole studied letter-writing as an art and understood its
distinctive features. There is no violent change in his style from
beginning to end of his correspondence ; but a gradual growth
may be observed in his artistic treatment of his matter. He could
criticise other letter-writers with judgment and good taste; but
there was one, above all, who was only to be worshipped, and that
was Madame de Sévigné. He tells Richard Bentley that
?
My Lady Hervey has made me most happy by bringing me from Paris an
admirable copy of the very portrait (of Mme de Sévigné] that was Madame
de Simiane's (her granddaughter). I am going to build an altar for it, under
the title of Notre Dame des Rochers!
Walpole addresses the same Lady Hervey from Paris (8 October
1765) to the effect that he had called upon Madame Chabot.
She was not at home, but the Hotel de Carnavalet was; and I stopped on
purpose to say an Ave Maria before it. It is a very singular building, not
at all in the French style, and looks like an ex voto raised to her honour by
some of her votaries (Mme de Sévigné's]. I don't think her honoured half
enough in her own country? .
Mrs Toynbee's edition contains a total of three thousand and
sixty-one letters, addressed by Walpole to one hundred and sixty
1 24 December 1754.
? This interesting old house is now well known as the home of the Carnavalet
Eleven years after this, Madame Du Deffand hoaxed Walpole by sending
him a snuffbox with a portrait of Mme de Sévigné copied from one he greatly admired.
This was sent with a letter signed · Rabutin de Sévigné' and beginning thus: 'Je
connois votre folle passion pour moi ; votre enthousiasme pour mes lettres, votre vénération
pour les lieus que j'ai habités. ' In acknowledging the gift from judge Hardinge of
four drawings of the château de Grignan, in a letter dated 4 July 1779, Walpole
wrote: 'I own that Grignan is grander, and in a much finer situation than I had
imagined ; as I concluded the witchery of Madame de Sévigné's ideas and style had
spread the same leaf-gold over places with which she gilded her friends. ' (See Nichols's
Literary Anecdotes, vol. VIII, p. 526. )
museum,
## p. 249 (#275) ############################################
His Chief Correspondents 249
correspondents, many of them men and women of mark. The
number of letters to some of these personages are very few, but
among them are seven, to each of whom over one hundred letters
were written by him. Sir Horace Mann heads the list with 820,
then comes the countess of Upper Ossory with 400. The other
five have smaller numbers, as George Montagu 263, William
Mason 217, William Cole 180, Henry Conway 179 and Mary
Berry 159. The lifelong correspondence with Mann exhibits a
unique instance of friendship, maintained without personal inter-
course for forty-five years. Walpole might well say to his friend
(4 December 1785), “You and I have long out-friendshipped Orestes
and Pylades. '
Mann was an early friend of Walpole, and his appointment in
1737 as assistant to Charles Fane (afterwards second viscount
Fane), envoy extraordinary at the court of Florence, by Sir Robert
Walpole, was entirely owing to this intimacy. In 1740, Mann be-
came Fane's successor, and Walpole visited him at Florence in the
same year. After returning to England in September 1741, Walpole
never saw his friend again. Mann never left Italy, although, in
1755, he succeeded his elder brother in the possession of the
family estate at Linton, Kent. His chief duties were to look after
the two 'pretenders' and to entertain distinguished English
travellers in Italy. He was kept informed by Walpole of all that
was going on in England, and he returned the favour by writing
continuously in reply, though, it must be said, giving Walpole lead
in return for his gold? It should, however, not be overlooked,
that, when writing to Mann and other friends abroad, Walpole
always feared the opening of his letters at the post office. He
complains to the earl of Hertford? :
As my letters are seldom proper for the post now I begin them at any time,
and am forced to trust to chance for a conveyance. This difficulty renders
my news very stale.
Walpole, writing to Lady Ossorys, praised women as far better
letter-writers than men. When he wrote 'I could lay down as an
infallible truth in the words of my god-father, Pennis non homini
datis, the English of which is, “It was not given to man to write
letters," it is just possible that it occurred to him how the dictum
might apply to his friend Mann. Some of Walpole's best letters
1 Peter Cunningham described Mann's letters as utterly unreadable. ' A selection
of them was published by Doran in 1876, under the irritating title Mann and Manners
at the Court of Florence.
3 3 August 1764.
3 Christmas day 1773.
6
"
## p. 250 (#276) ############################################
250
Letter-Writers
were addressed to his frequent correspondent Lady Ossory. Mary
Berry would have stood higher in the numerical list; but Walpole
did not become intimate with her and her father and sister until
late in his life in the winter of 1788). Madame Du Deffand's
letters to Walpole were first printed by Miss Berry and afterwards
reprinted in Paris? A complete edition of these letters, edited
.
by the late Mrs Toynbee, was published in 1912. Walpole's letters
to Madame Du Deffand were burnt at his particular request. It
is supposed that he did not wish them to be published, lest his
French should be criticised. He wrote to Mason? : 'Mme Du
Deffand has told me that I speak French worse than any English-
man she knows. ' A little too much has been made of Walpole's
gallicisms, although there certainly is a remarkable one in the
preface to Historic Doubts on Richard III :
It is almost a question whether if the dead of past ages could revive, they
would be able to reconnoitre3 the events of their own times as transmitted
to us.
Thomas Pitt, first Lord Camelford (nephew of the great Chatham),
writing to judge Hardinge in 1789, refers to the translation of
Walpole's Essay on Gardening by the duc de Nivernais :
I shall be glad to see the work of M. de Nivernois, if it answers at all to
the specimens you have sent me. The truth is that, as Mr Horace Walpole
always thinks in French he ought never to write in English; and I dare be
sworn Nivernois' translation will appear the more original work of the two4.
Did Hannah More venture to ‘chaff' Walpole when she sent him
anonymously a clever letter dated' Alamode Castle, June 20, 1840'
and headed it ‘A Specimen of the English language, as it will be
written and spoken in the next century. In a letter from a lady
to her friend in the reign of George V'? Walpole acknowledged
this letter (5 April 1785) with cordiality and much praise, to show
that ‘his withers were unwrung. Walpole expressed to Lady
'
Ossory (Christmas day 1781) his opinion that 'Letters ought to be
nothing but extempore conversation upon paper,' and, doubtless,
his conversation was much like his letters, and as excellent. His
wit was ready and brilliant in both forms of communication. He
was himself proud of the witty apophthegm which he seems to
have first imparted to Mann by word of mouth :
Recollect what I have said to you, that this world is a comedy to those
who think, a tragedy to those who feel. This is the quintessence of all I
have learnt in fifty years5!
1 See bibliography.
2 5 July 1773.
3 This use of the word 'reconnoitre’ in English was quite obsolete in Walpole's day.
Nichols's Literary Illustrations, vol. vii, p. 118. 5 5 March 1772.
5
## p. 251 (#277) ############################################
His Experiences and Anecdotes 251
At any rate, the saying has found its way into books of familiar
quotations.
Numerous instances might be given of the value of the letters
in illustration of history; but, in spite of the popular notion as to
the frivolity of a large part of their contents, it may safely be said
that matters of moment are dealt with throughout the series, and
sidelights are to be found on every page. There is, first, the
Jacobite rising of 1745. Then, we have the trials of the Jacobites,
and, for a time, there is peace, broken by the excitement of
Wilkes's publication of The North Briton and subsequent riots.
Walpole was attacked in no. 2 of The North Briton; and Wilkes
was annoyed that he did not seem to mind the attack. In a letter
to Mann? , Walpole laments the state of the nation, and, after
giving instances of the grievous increase of gambling, he writes
'We are not a great age, but surely we are tending to some
great revolution. The American war was the next great event
to supply Walpole with material for invective and complaints of
bad government. At the end of his life came the great con-
vulsion of the French revolution and, in September 1789, he
congratulated Hannah More on the demolition of the Bastille,
the reform of which he related fourteen years before? The
enormities of the revolutionaries changed his political views, as
they did those of the majority of Englishmen, and he welcomed
with enthusiasm Burke's Reflections. He said that it painted the
queen 'exactly as she appeared to me the first time I saw her
when Dauphiness 3. '
Many of Walpole's anecdotes are valuable as illustrations of
the manners of the time and contain information not to be found
elsewhere; but the chief interest of his correspondence remains
autobiographical. The first hundred pages of Mrs Toynbee's
edition contain letters, from 1732 to 1741, to Charles Lyttelton,
Gray, West, George Montagu, Thomas Ashton and Henry Conway,
for the most part written during Walpole's travels. The first letter
to Mann was written on 11 September 1741. From this time, the
complete autobiography may be said to begin, and it continues to
the end. Walpole wrote an interesting advertisement prefixed to
the Letters to Mann, explaining his reasons for preserving them,
which is too long to quote here, but will be found in a note to the
first letter. For the incidents of his early life we must search
1 2 February 1770.
2 25 October 1775.
3 See, also, his anecdote of Marie-Antoinette as queen, in his letter to Mary Berry,
3 July 1790.
## p. 252 (#278) ############################################
252
Letter-Writers
elsewhere, and he has left us the main particulars in the Short
Notes of My Life.
Walpole's character may be easily understood by anyone who
studies his correspondence. In early life, he was not very different
from a large number of the highbred men of the eighteenth century
who took pride in their social position, for it is necessary to
remember that there were two classes of men in the English society
of this age-the jovial and the coarse, and the reserved and
refined. Sir Robert Walpole belonged to the former, and his son
Horace to the latter. Horace was never very young, and his
father said of himself that he was the younger of the two. Horace
adds 1: 'Indeed I think so in spite of his forty years more. ' The
son began life with a character for frankness and enthusiasm; but,
as he grew into the cynical man of the world, he became colder in
manner to mere acquaintances, reserving his true self only for his
bosom friends. He cultivated an extreme fastidiousness and severe
refinement, which caused him to exhibit a distaste for a robust
humour that he considered vulgar. This powerful prejudice caused
him to propound much absurd criticism. He could not admire
Fielding because he kept 'low company, and condemned the
'vulgarity of his character. ' For the beautiful and pathetic
Voyage to Lisbon he could find no praise, and he refers to
'Fielding's Travels or rather an account of how his dropsy was
treated,' and how he was teased by an innkeeper's wife in the Isle
of Wight? He could not appreciate the genius of Richardson and
refers to
those tedious lamentations - Clarissa, and Sir Charles Grandison, which are
pictures of high life as conceived by a bookseller, and romances as they would
be spiritualised by a Methodist preacher.
Sterne was no more fortunate in obtaining the good opinion of
Walpole, who writes to Henry Zouch :
The second and third volumes of Tristram Shandy, the dregs of nonsense,
have universally met the contempt they deserve: genius may be exhausted ;-
I see that folly's invention may be so too4.
He could appreciate Johnson's great qualities; but he was repelled
by his roughness. He said wittily :
Johnson made the most brutal speeches to living persons, for though he
was goodnatured at bottom he was very ill-natured at top.
In considering Walpole's affected remarks on his own literary
character, we should bear in mind the expressed opinions of so
| 22 January 1742.
2 27 March 1755.
3 20 December 1760.
4 7 March 1761.
## p. 253 (#279) ############################################
Walpole's Earlier Works
253
aristocratic an author as Byron, at a much later date. Walpole
thought it would disgrace him to be known as a learned author,
although, in his heart, he was proud of his books. He discloses his
true character with a fine instinct more frequently when writing
to Mann than to any other correspondent. At a quite early date,
he takes Mann to task for over-estimating his abilities.
I must answer for your brother a paragraph that he showed me in one of
your letters 'Mr W's letters are full of wit; don't they adore them in Eng-
land? ' Not at all--and I don't wonder at them; for if I have any wit in my
letters, which I do not at all take for granted, it is ten to one I have none out of
my letters. . . . Then as to adoring; you now see only my letters, and you may be
sure I take care not to write you word of any of my bad qualities, which other
people must see in the gross; and that may be a great hindrance to their
adoration. Oh! there are a thousand other reasons I could give you, why I
am not the least in fashion. I came over in an ill season: it is a million to
one that nobody thinks a declining old minister's son has wit. At any time
men in opposition have always most; but now it would be absurd for a courtier
to have even common sensel.
The history of the growth of Walpole's works is fully detailed
in the Correspondence; and, apparently, nearly all his books were
written at high pressure. He particularly notes how long a time
was occupied in their production. He was a dabbler in literature
from his early life. He wrote, in 1742, a sermon on painting for
the amusement of his father, which was afterwards published in
Ædes Walpoliance, and he was continually writing occasional
verses, a practice in which he persevered when he possessed a
private printing-press. It was not, however, until 1753 that he
may be said to have begun his literary career with the writing
of some clever papers in The World, a periodical written by men
of fashion for men of fashion. His first substantive work was
A Catalogue of the Royal and Noble Authors of England, printed
at the Strawberry hill press in 1758. It is of no great value as a
bibliography, but, dealing as it does with a distinctive subject, is
of occasional use as well as of some interest. The next work,
Anecdotes of Painting in England, also printed at the Strawberry
hill press, in 1762, is the only one of Walpole's works which has
really held its position. It was reprinted several times by its
author and twice reedited. The publication originated in the
purchase of Vertue's valuable collections from his widow in
1756. 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.
