William Gifford to Edward Copleston (3/11/1811)

[ correspondence archive main page ]
William Gifford to Edward Copleston
Mar. 11, 1811
[ transcription conventions ]

Devon 1149M/F85. 3pp. Date at top: March 11, 1811


James St

March 11th. 1811


My dear Sir,

I was not aware that I had so strangely misstated my meaning; but I wrote in a hurry. I never had an idea of desiring you to abridge the Article in question, which I think a most excellent one & intirely to the purpose. I merely intended to say that if any word could be softened with propriety, I should not be sorry as Whitaker was a zealous and able friend of ours; but this, I left intirely to you.1 As to the passage I 28, I really do not see that it can be mended, and assuredly I have no objection to it.

It strikes me at this instant that you ^probably may allude to something which Murray may have blundered on, as the proof came thro' him—Launce's dog Crabb2, never led his master into more scrapes than Murray has me: in a word, my dear Sir, he must be put intirely out of the question , & though of no more than a middling infant—"A good man, neighbour, but his wits are not as blunt as—they should be.["] "He will be talking".3 Meantime, I hope that I am not injuring him, for I have not seen him—I have however sent him word to forward the proof immediately.

What do you think of Prince Eugene for Mr Vaux? He has probably seen the article on Him in the last Edin. Rev. That is not, I think, insuperable; but he can judge. It was written for the Quarterly by Dr——^of Manchester I do not recollect his name—the person who detected Hume's plagiarisms from old Burton,—He told Heber that Sidney Smith had begged it of him so importunately that he could not refuse it.4

Ever my dear Sir, with sincere

regards, your most faithful

friend & servt

Wm. Gifford