Vol 4. No. 8
Quarterly Review
VOLUME 4, NUMBER
8 (November
1810)
- This Number was published 29 Dec. 1810
[Murray MS. accounts books; BL MS. 28099 (f.87), WG to George Ellis, 21
Dec. 1810; Murray MS., Paid Contributors List for issue Number 8]
- Murray MS., George Ellis to JM, 9 Oct. 1810: 'Why say that No 8 will be
published in November when we know that this cannot be? Why not say fairly
that No 8 will appear early in Decr. and that the future Numbers will appear
regularly every quarter? '
- After the POSTSCRIPT (see next note), the following notice appears promising
the timely publication of Number 9 (Number 9 appeared 18 April 1811):
No. IX. will be published early in March, 1811.
- The following notice appears on page 536 of QR Volume IV, following article
#129:
POSTSCRIPT. / Whilst our attention has been absorbed by the forgoing article, we learned that Sir John Sinclair has again buckled on his armour, and is actually scouring the country, with a pamphlet much larger than the former, determined to clear away any scattered remains of coin, which prejudice and obstinacy may still be endeavouring to obtrude into circulation. We could not now attend Sir John on this second sally, without delaying the publication of our present Number: and must therefore defer, till our next, the faithful record of his farther achievements against the unbelievers in paper.
- Murray printed 5000 of this Number.
By November 1811, he still had on hand 600 copies. [Murray MS., accounts
book]
- The Number cost Murray £823, including
£127 for printing, £2 for wrappers, £21 for corrections, £1.5 for clean
proofs, £2 for Sunday and night work, £1 compensation to the printer for
'extra trouble', £301 for paper, £72 for stitching, £10 for books and incidentals,
£19.12 for advertising, £52 for the editor and copyright, £178 for articles,
£23 extra for article 13 (#127, by Robert Southey)
- Printer: C. Rowarth, Bell-yard, Temple-bar, London
- Booksellers (listed on the title page): Hatchard,
Piccadilly; Richardson, Cornhill; Parker, Oxford; Deighton, Cambridge; Wm
Blackwood and Co. Edinburgh; M. N. Mahon, Dublin
- John Wilson Croker attempted to mediate into
the QR an article on the bullion controversy that had been proposed
by the Prime Minister, Spenser Perceval (see #124), but it was turned aside
by WG, who wished to protect the QR's independence
- Important or especially interesting articles
in this Number include: #115 (a judicious review of Crabbe by Robert Grant),
#120, #124, #126, #127 (Southey on Nonconformist evangelicalism), #129
- Number of definite attributions for this issue:
14
- Number of probable or possible attributions for
this issue: none
- Number of articles for which no suggestion of authorship is made: 1
CONTENTS, IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRIBUTORS, AND HISTORICAL NOTES
115 Article 1. Crabbe, The Borough; a Poem. In Twenty-four Letters, 281-312. Author: Robert Grant.
Running Title: Crabbe's Borough.
Notes: In attributing the article to Grant, Shine cites JM III's Register and its note for #115. Shine also cites Grierson II 397, 397n. Shine quotes from the following two letters. Murray MS., WG to JM, [7 Aug. 1810 postmark]: 'Of Crabbe, he [Heber] says, that he hears it is proceeding—but he has not seen any part of it.' Murray MS., WG to JM [Sept. 1810]: 'Pitt, I am informed I shall have tomorrow. One sheet of Crabbe is come ... I am promised two sheets more directly.' In suggesting William Gifford as an alternative attribution, Shine cites Gentleman's Magazine XXI 138; Graham 41; Huchon 305; and says to see also Clark 187, 188, 191-92, 200, 273n: Clark doubts Gifford's authorship.
The following evidence is published here for the first time. The Shine volume attributes the article to Grant only by a happy accident as Shine confuses the notes in JM III's Register that apply to #114 as applying to #115. Shine was led in the right direction by Grierson II 397, 397n. Scott offered to review this work, but WG found out too late that Richard or Reginald Heber had already offered it to an anonymous friend. The article was received in time for Number 7, but its length kept it out.
NLS MS. 3879 (f.60), WG to Walter Scott, 30 Apr. 1810: 'Without speaking to me, he [Heber, probably Richard or possibly Reginald] had put Crabbe into the hands of an anonymous friend even before I wrote my last letter. This I only learned upon telling him that I was just sending it to you. ... What is nearly as bad, is that this person (whose name he will not tell me) is, by his own account, extremely idle ....' BL MS. 28099 (ff.73-74), WG to George Ellis, 21 May 1810: 'Scott offered to review Crabb, but the reckless Heber, whose kindness deserves all praise, had unfortunately ... promised it to an anonymous friend .... I hope he is not mistaken ....' BL MS. 28099 (f.83), WG to Ellis, 1 Oct. 1810: '... we shall have a charming article on Crabbe, written with great ability and taste. The writer is perfectly unknown: his communication was sent by a servant, whom I did not see.' NLS MS. 3879 (ff.227-28), WG to Scott, 27 Oct. 1810: 'Crabbe was printed [in time for Number 7], but the length of this (for which I was not prepared) made it impracticable to give it in the present No.'
The subject of this article was reviewed in ER #512, Apr. 1810, by Francis Jeffrey.
JM II's marked QR: 'Rob Grant'.
JM III's 'Register': [in black ink] 'Wm Gifford' [in red ink] '?'.
116 Article 2. Patten, The Natural Defence of an Insular Empire, earnestly recommended; with a Sketch of a Plan to attach real Seamen to the Service of their Country, 313-33. Author: John Barrow, possibly with Robert Southey.
Running Title: Patten's Natural Defence of an Insular Empire.
Notes: In attributing the article to Barrow, Shine cites JM III's Register and notes its citation of JM II's marked QR.
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Shine did not have access to JM II's marked QR and therefore missed the possible connection to Southey. No additional evidence has been identified to substantiate JM's II's reference to Southey. Murray MS., Paid Contributors List: the same person was paid for articles 2 and 5 in this Number. BL MS. 28099 (f.86), WG to George Ellis, 15 Nov. 1810: 'I have printed ... a useful article on Patten's foolish & mischievous book ....' The author is obviously an Admiralty official. The DNB article on Patten points out that Barrow's Life of Lord Howe repeats, in almost the same words, the defence in this article of the Lords of Admiralty against Patten's criticism that most Lords are civilians with no naval experience. Compare #116 p.322: 'If a man indeed can be supposed so far to divest himself of the best feelings of human nature, from the moment that he takes his seat at the admiralty board, as to shake off at once all recollections of the companions of his early days ...' with p. 192 of Barrow's Life of Lord Howe: ' How indeed can it be expected that a professional man should cast aside the best feelings of human nature ... that he should turn aside from these companions of his early days ....'
JM II's marked QR: [in ink] 'Barrow' [in pencil] '& Southey'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Barrow, citing JM II's marked QR.
117 Article 3. Landt, A Description of the Feroe Islands, containing an Account of their Situation, Climate, and Productions; together with the Manners and Customs of the Inhabitants, their Trade, &c. Illustrated with a Map and other Engravings. Translated from the Danish, 333-42. Author: Robert Southey.
Running Title: Landt's Description of the Feroe Islands.
Notes: In attributing the article to Southey, Shine cites JM III's Register; Smiles I 182; Cottle 242-43; and Southey 577.
The following evidence is published here for the first time. The article is in Southey's definitive MS. list of his QR articles. Murray MS., Paid Contributors List: the same person was paid for articles 3 and 13 in this Number. BL MS. 28099 (f.86), WG to George Ellis, 15 Nov. 1810: 'I have printed ... a very decent article from Southey ....' This article is referred to on p.513 of #178, which is by John Barrow.
JM II's marked QR: 'Southey'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Southey, citing JM II's marked QR.
118 Article 4. Chalmers, Caledonia; or an Account Historical and Topographical of North Britain, from the most ancient to the present Times: with a Dictionary of Places chorographical and philological, 342-60. Author: Thomas Dunham Whitaker.
Running Title: Chalmers' Caledonia.
Notes: In attributing the article to Whitaker, Shine cites JM III's Register and notes its citation of JM II's marked QR. Shine also cites Nichols xxix, xxxiv n2 .
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Murray MS., Book Loans Register: the book reviewed was sent to 'Dr Whitaker' on 7 Aug. 1810. Another entry dated only 1810 under 'Dr Whitaker' includes the notation 'Q. Rev. No.8' . There are parallels in treatment and content between this article and #143, which is also by Whitaker. Both articles open with a peon to Gough. Devon MS. 1149 (f.80), WG to Edward Copleston, 9 Jan. 1811, refers to Whitaker's 'powerful ... critique on Chalmers.'
JM II's marked QR: 'Rev. Dr. Whitaker'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Whitaker, citing JM II's marked QR.
119 Article 5. Weston, The Conquest of the Miao-tsé; an Imperial Poem by Kien Lung, entitled, A Choral Song of Harmony, for the first Part of Spring, 361-72. Author: John Barrow.
Running Title: Weston's Conquest of the Miao-tsé.
Notes: In attributing the article to Barrow, Shine cites JM III's Register and notes its citation of JM II's marked QR.
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Murray MS., Paid Contributors List for issue Number 8: the same person was paid for articles 2 and 5 in this Number. The article's author refers back to #85 (three times), which is also by Barrow, and this article is mentioned in #302, an article by Barrow. The author of #142WI (Barrow) takes credit for this article and articles #85, 147, 333, and 389, all of which are by Barrow. In his QR articles, it was Barrow's signature practice to refer to his own works.
JM II's marked QR: 'Barrow'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Barrow, citing JM II's marked QR.
120 Article 6. Price, Essays on the Picturesque, as compared with the Sublime and the Beautiful; and the Use of studying Pictures for the purpose of improving the real Landscape, 372-82. Author not identified.
Running Title: Price, on the Picturesque.
Notes: In the absence of guidance from JM III's Register, Shine does not suggest an attribution for this article.
The following information is published here for the first time. Price is cited by the author of #84WI, probably William Stewart Rose, and by the author of #153WI, Sir Walter Scott. Devon MS. 1149M (f.79), WG to Edward Copleston, 18 Oct. 1810, accepts his proposal for an article 'though not interesting in itself; but it may be made so by adjuncts ....' The reference may be to this article or to #122, but more likely to #133.
121 Article 7. Musœ Cantabrigienses; seu Carmina quœ Numismate aureo Cantabrigiœ, et Procancellarii permissu edita. Veneunt apud Lunn, Ondinensem; et Bibliopolas Cantabrigienses, Oxonienses et Etonenses, 382-92. Author: Thomas Falconer, with Edward Copleston.
Running Title: Musœ Cantabrigienses.
Notes: In querying its attribution to Falconer, Shine cites JM III's Register. Shine also quotes from the following letters. Murray MS., WG to JM, [Nov. 1810 numbered 103]: 'Falconer you may have in a day or two ....' Murray MS., WG to JM, [1810 numbered 108+]: 'Mr H has seen Falconer & he thinks, as every scholar must, very highly of it.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [Oct. - Nov. 1810]: 'I sent the Cam verses yesterday....'
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Murray MS., WG to JM, [24] Sept. 1810: 'It was certainly not by my advice that Huet [#109] was made to follow Wordsworth [#108], when either the Cam verses or Field's article [#112] ... should have come before it.' Murray MS., JM to WG, 25 Sept. 1810 [draft]: 'As soon as I had read your obliging note this morning I sent over the Cambridge verses & Fields article which can both follow the Diary [#111] ....' Devon MS. 1149M (f.80), WG to Edward Copleston, 9 Jan. 1811: 'I come now to your friendly attention to Falconer; you have much improved his essay, and your Introductory matter is very good indeed, & to the purpose. I really feel myself deeply obliged to your kindness and beg you to accept my sincere acknowledgements.' These comments may refer to #141.
JM III's Register: 'Arts in this No by Sayers & Falconer / see W Gs letter No 103 / also D'Oyly & Walpole / see W.G. 108 .x.'
122 Article 8. Woodhouse, A Treatise on Plane and Spherical Trigonometry, 392-402. Author: Olinthus Gregory, probably.
Running Title: Woodhouse's Trigonometry.
Notes: In the absence of guidance from JM III's Register, Shine does not suggest an attribution for this article.
Some of the following evidence was first published in VPR 28. The article's author refers back to #103, which is by Gregory. On p.401, Hutton's trigonometry tables are preferred over Sherwin's, a point advanced in #144, which is also by Gregory. Hutton was Gregory's mentor. Gregory published Plane and Spherical Geometry (1816). See note at #103. The article is in the manner of the author of #103. Not in Young's definitive MS. list of his QR articles. Woodhouse is also reviewed in #518, possibly by John Brinkley or possibly by Olinthus Gregory.
[Bookseller's note, from DSB: 'Woodhouse, Robert (1883-1827) was professor of mathematics at Cambridge. "Woodhouse's ... writings include a history of the calculus of variations (1810). In all these works Woodhouse presented the results of continental research from the time of Newton up to his time".']
The subject of this article was reviewed in ER #538, Nov. 1810, by John Playfair.
123 Article 9. Clifford, The State Papers and Letters of Sir Ralph Sadler, Knight Banneret. To which is added, A Memoir of the Life of Sir Ralph Sadler, with Historical Notes by Walter Scott, Esq., 403-14. Author: Edmund Lodge, with Walter Scott.
Running Title: Sir Ralph Sadleir's State Papers.
Notes: In attributing the article to Lodge, Shine cites JM III's Register; Gentleman's Magazine XXI 138; and the DNB entry on Lodge.
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Lodge, editor of the Talbot papers, appears to have been dissuaded from reviewing his own work and given instead the task of reviewing Clifford. The article starts out with a comparison of Clifford to Lodge and credits the latter as having influenced the former. Murray MS., Book Loans Register: the book reviewed was sent to 'E. Lodge' on 8 Nov. 1809. NLS MS. 3879 (f.60), WG to Walter Scott, 30 Apr. 1810, sends Scott a review of 'Sir R. Sadlier by Lodge' and asks him to look at it. 'A touch or two from your hand (for I am not conversant with the subject) will be of vast use to the article. ... Make what alterations you think fit; all is at your mercy.' NLS MS. 3879 (f.74), WG to Scott, 9 May, 1810, concerning 'Lodge,' asks only for a 'few hints all votre facón ....' NLS MS. 3879 (f.116), WG to Scott, 24 May 1810, requests that Scott forward 'Lodge' along with 'Evans' (#100). 'I shall not be sorry to oblige Lodge, who will, I think, do better with practice. Make what alterations you think fit; all is at your mercy.' NLS MS. 3879 (f.228), WG to Scott, 27 Oct. 1810: 'Do you think Lodge's little article strong enough, after the ill nature of Jeffrey? I was doubtful & therefore omitted it: but if you say the word it shall now go in.' Sadleir is spelled Sadler in the head note as above (concerning which, see page 404 of the article).
The subject of this article was reviewed in ER #530, Aug. 1810, by Macvey Napier.
JM II's marked QR: 'Lodge'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Lodge, but without evidence.
124 Article 10. Huskisson, The Question Concerning the Depreciation of Our Currency, stated and examined, 414-53. Author: George Ellis, with George Canning.
Running Title: Huskisson, on the Depreciation of Currency.
Notes: In attributing the article to Ellis, Shine cites JM III's Register and Grierson II 428n. Shine also quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, Dec. 20, 1810: 'I have recd the pamphlets ... in time for Mr C who has this moment taken them to Sunning Hill ... I have also desired G E to hasten his first article....'
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Murray MS., Paid Contributors List for issue Number 8: the same person was paid for articles 10 and 15 in this Number. Murray MS., George Ellis to JM, 1 Oct. 1810, says that a friend (i.e., Huskisson, see next letter) has sent him a pamphlet to be printed by Murray that he (Ellis) will review in the next Number. 'The general subject, I am aware, is the rightful property of our unknown contributor who reviewed Ricardo ....' The 'unknown contributor' is Robert Grant; see #78. Murray MS., Ellis to JM, 9 Oct. 1810, speaks of the pamphlet in question as Huskisson's. BL MS. 28099 (f.83), WG to Ellis, 1 Oct. 1810, says he is glad Ellis intends 'to take up the subject of the Bank restriction, which is now become very interesting, and since the publication & active dispersion of Horner's Report, has assumed a terrifying aspect. I will get at our friend [i.e., Grant], as soon as I can ascertain where Heber is ... but as the subject will still be open to him, I cannot see that any consideration of what he may wish hereafter to undertake need stop you for a moment.' Harewood MS., WG to George Canning, 6 Oct. 1810: 'I wish our unknown friend [i.e., Grant] could have done it [reviewed Huskisson's pamphlet which, he says, Ellis is reviewing]—but he is a terrible thief of time & the question admits no delay, as the subject is in general agitation at present.' BL MS. 28099 (ff.85-86), WG to Ellis, 15 Nov. 1810, says 'our invisible friend' (i.e., Grant) will not write on the bank restriction and leaves the field open to 'Mr. Ellis.' Murray MS., Ellis to JM, 25 Nov. 1810, says he will begin his review of Huskisson. Murray MS., Ellis to JM, [n.d.]: 'I have begun the critique of Huskisson ....' BL MS. 28099 (f.65), WG to Ellis, [26 Nov. 1810], speaks of Ellis's 'finance' article. Harewood MS., Ellis to Canning, Wed. Dec. 1810, says that Murray is impatient for the review of Huskisson. States that 'Perceval, I find, has sketched the substance of a review of Huskisson, embellished by Croker, and [intended to be] inserted in our Quarterly. The proposal was communicated by Croker to Giff; who bounced, comme de raison, and manfully vindicated our independence.' Murray MS., 1803-23 Letter Book, Canning to WG, 9 Dec. 1810, says he received Sir John (#129) by post and hopes to return it tomorrow and expects 'another parcel of G. E.'s Husk'n to send me ....' Devon MS. 1149M (f.80), WG to Edward Copleston, 9 Jan. 1811, says Ellis too busy with 'Huskisson' and 'Sir John' to review Roscoe (#134). BL MS. 29281 (ff.32-33), William Nichol to Henry Boase, 23 Jan. 1811: 'Canning and his friend Geo. Ellis helped Huskisson in his pamphlet—Ellis has also reviewed it in the Quarterly Review.' The volume under review was published by John Murray.
[Bookseller's note: 'Winning clear praise from Ricardo, the present work is Huskisson's most celebrated. Its writing was directly stimulated by Huskisson serving on the famous Bullion Committee and is, essentially, a further discussion and clarification of its findings. According to the Dictionary of National Biography, the publication of this pamphlet "at once met with success and earned Huskisson the reputation of being the first financier of the age". The note circulation of the Bank of England had expanded from an average of 11 millions in 1795 to nearly 20 millions in 1809. Specie payments having been suspended in 1797, and the paper circulation having been increased, the foreign exchanges had become unfavourable to Britain and the paper bank-note circulation was depreciated in comparison with gold. The Bullion Committee found that the over-issue of paper money ought to be brought back to "the original principle of Cash payments at the option of the holder of Bank paper money". Ricardo was to show in his 1810 pamphlet The High Price of Bullion a Proof of the Depreciation of Bank Notes conclusively that the value of the Bank note was depreciated from excess of issue; but much of the ground-work had already been performed by Huskisson here. Ricardo certainly had a copy of this major pamphlet of Huskisson's in his library since that copy actually survives. It has a penciled note in Ricardo's hand "The passages marked as those upon which I see reason to differ with the author." See Sraffa's Edition of Ricardo, vol.x, p.400 where the exact passages are given.']
The subject of this article was reviewed in ER #547, Feb. 1811, by T. R. Malthus, and in ER #574, Aug. 1811, by T. R. Malthus.
JM III's Register: attribution to Ellis, and with the following note: 'see G E's letter Oct 3, 1810.'
125 Article 11. Southey, History of Brazil, 454-74. Author: Reginald Heber.
Running Title: Southey's History of Brazil.
Notes: In attributing the article to Heber, Shine cites JM III's Register and Graham 41. Shine says to see also Robberds II 340 and Warter II 209, 307-8. Shine quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, [20 Dec. 1810 postmark]: 'Mr H. has not yet returned the Brazils—which he wished to see & took last night. As soon as I get it back, it shall be corrected and sent!'
The following evidence is published here for the first time. BL MS. 28099 (f.67), WG to George Ellis, 13 Oct. [1810]: 'Southey's Brazil is in Heber's hand, & he promises it in time.'
[Bookseller's note: 'Southey's Brazil was originally intended to form part of a much larger history of Portugal, but it was the only portion actually published. One of the most important works on the country, it is based on the excellent collection of books and manuscripts formed by the Reverend Herbert Hill, chaplain of the British colony at Lisbon. "Southey was perfectly aware of the value of his history. In 1823 he wrote to Henry Koster: 'I am far from regretting that so much time and labour had been bestowed upon a subject for which few English readers (such as readers now are) can be expected to feel much interest. What I have done is in many parts imperfect; it is nevertheless even now a great achievement. As long as I live I shall carefully correct and enlarge it from whatever documents, written or printed, may come to my hands, and centuries hence, when Brazil shall have become the great and prosperous country which one day it must be, I shall be regarded there as the first person who ever attempted to give a consistent form to its crude, unconnected and neglected history.' Southey was by no means mistaken in his appraisal of the History. Capistrano de Abreu judged it superior to Varnhagen's Historia General, "in form, in conception, in perception." (Borba de Moraes) Borba de Moraes II 823-24. NCBEL III 256. Sabin 88552.']
JM II's marked QR: 'Rev. R. Heber'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Heber, but without evidence.
126 Article 12. Britton, Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain, 474-80. Author: Frank Sayers.
Running Title: Britton's Architectural Antiquities.
Notes: In querying its attribution to Sayers, Shine cites JM III's Register and says to see Robberds II 294, 297-98, 'which supply important hints.' Shine also quotes from the following two letters. Murray MS., WG to JM, 20 July 1810: 'I will look over Sayers .... & send ... by tomorrow's coach.... Sayers, though well written, is not of much importance, I see; but he seems fond of it, and it can do us no harm.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [Nov. 1810]: 'I send you Sayers ....'
The following evidence is published here for the first time. Sayers' Disquisitions is recommended on p.479. Note mention of Whittington on pp.477-78 (see #601).
[Bookseller's note: 'Britton was instrumental in improving the standards of topographical writing and illustration and for making topography accessible to the public. This set presents chronological and historical illustrations of the ancient architecture of Great Britain, containing a series of engravings accompanied by historical and descriptive accounts. "The artistic excellence of the illustrations procured success for what Southey pronounced to be 'the most beautiful work of the kind that had ever till then appeared." (DNB II, 1268). Russell, Guide to British Topographical Prints, 51. Brunet I, part 2, 1267.']
JM III's Register: note at head of Number 8: 'Arts in this No by Sayers & Falconer. See W G's letter No 103.'
127 Article 13. Hints to the Public and the Legislature, on the Nature and Effect of Evangelical Preaching. Part the First. By a Barrister. Fourth Edition.—Part the Second. Third Edition.—Part the Third.—Part the Fourth, 480-514. Author: Robert Southey, with excisions by William Gifford and John Ireland.
Running Title: On the Evangelical Sects.
Notes:
In attributing the article to Southey, Shine cites JM III's Register; Warter
II 221, 308: Southey says the article has been mutilated; Cottle 242-43; Southey
577; Gentleman's Magazine XXI 138; and says to see also Grierson II
202, 202n; Southey 259; Forster 214; Warter II 149, 153, 191, 297, 249 [On
p.249 read sects instead of poets.] Shine also quotes from BL
MS. 30928 [no folio number given], Robert Southey to Charles Danvers, Oct.
1810: 'I am reviewing the Barristers Hints. Of all the rascally writers whom
I have ever <perused>
The following evidence is published here for the first time. WG, in writing to George Ellis said he thought the article 'wonderfully interesting' and that its opinions were 'in no way dangerous.' From the beginning, Southey's independence and his radical past caused suspicion among the QR's editorial coterie. WG convinced Southey to make a few omissions, and WG with the assistance of Dr. John Ireland made a few more in order to make the article 'safe.' Nothing, however, was added by WG or Ireland. Murray paid Southey an extra £23 for this article. The article appears in Southey's definitive MS. list of his QR articles. Murray MS., Paid Contributors List for issue Number 8: the same person was paid for articles 3 and 13 in this Number. BL MS. 28099 (f.87), WG to George Ellis, 21 Dec. 1810: 'We have a most extraordinary Article from Southey, on the Methodists. It is written with great power, & seems to me wonderfully interesting. I have watched it very closely—& hope it is no way dangerous.'
JM II's marked QR: 'Southey'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Southey, but without evidence.
128 Article 14. Mitford, Poems, 514-18. Authors: John Mitford and William Gifford, with Richard Heber.
Running Title: Mary Russell Mitford's Poems.
Notes: In co-attributing the article to Mitford and Gifford, Shine cites JM III's Register and notes its citation of JM II's marked QR. Shine also cites the DNB article on John Mitford and says to see also Hill 119. Shine quotes from the following two letters. Murray MS., WG to JM, [Nov. 1810]: 'I send you ... Mitford ... which I have endeavoured to make something of.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [Dec. 1810]: 'Mr Heber is decidedly for Mitford, which he thinks a severe but sprightly article.' In suggesting John Mitford alone as an alternative attribution, Shine cites JM III's Register and notes its citation of JM II's marked QR. Shine also cites Gentleman's Magazine XXI 138; Mitford I 54n; and Graham 41.
The following evidence and information is published here for the first time. WG was paid an extra £22.17 for the article, apparently because his contribution to it was considerable. Bodleian MS. Eng. lett. d.309 (f.5), Charles Edward Grey to Edward Copleston, 22 Jan. 1811, asks if he knew that the review of Miss Mitford was by her namesake. Murray MS., Cash Book 1810-11, p. 156: '3 May 1811 QR No 8 To Cash Draft No 1814 for VIII—14 extra £22.17'. Reprinted with edited portions restored in Alfred L'Estrange, Friendships of Mary Russell Mitford (1882).
JM II's marked QR: 'Mitford'
JM III's Register: attribution to 'Rev. J. Mitford' cites the marked QR and with the following note: 'aided by W Gifford'.
129 Article 15. Sinclair, Observations on the Report of the Bullion Committee, 518-36. Authors: George Ellis, George Canning, and William Huskisson, with John Murray.
Running Title: On the Reports of the Bullion Committee.
Notes: In co-attributing the article to Ellis, Canning, and Huskisson (in that order), Shine cites JM III's Register and notes its citation of JM II's marked QR. Shine also cites Marriott 146; Horner II 68; and Grierson II 428-29, 429n. Shine also quotes from the following letters. Murray MS., WG to JM, [Oct.- Nov. 1810]: 'I have recd the pamphlets, & made them up in time for Mr C[anning] who has ... taken them to Sunning Hill [Ellis's residence] where he stays tomorrow & Monday.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [dated in error Aug. 1811]: 'I have heard from C & from Sunning Hill & they have sent ... suggestions for the last Article which they wish me to interweave ... Sir J you shall have as soon as I have made the alterations which I only recd this morning.' Murray MS., WG to JM, [?Nov. 1810]: 'I have just recd notes from Mr E & Mr C respecting one erasure in the proofs of Sir John .... The quotation is from Lear, & is, I think, a speech of the Fool ....' Murray MS., WG to JM, [9 Dec. 1810]: [notation on the letter in JM II's hand: 'Q Rev No 8 article on Sir John Sinclair—returned with very considerable alterations corrections & additions by Mr C in his own handwriting—J.M.'] '... Mr C will call here to see that his marginal marks have been understood ....' In suggesting George Ellis and George Canning as an alternative co-attribution, Shine cites JM III's Register and its citation of JM II's marked QR. Shine also cites Gentleman's Magazine XXI 138; QR CCX 744; and says to see also DNB III 875. In suggesting Walter Scott as a queried third alternative attribution, Shine cites JM III's Register and Grierson II 428, 428n. Shine says to see also Grierson II 41, 41n. Shine also quotes from Murray MS., WG to JM, [Dec. 1810 numbered 106]: 'The rest of Scott is come.'
The following additional evidence is published here for the first time. Canning's additions and alterations to the proof-sheets were 'considerable', but JM II appears to have exaggerated Canning's role. At JM II's request, WG edited out all but one negative reference to the Edinburgh Review. The article was meant to compliment #124. WG proudly pointed out to Walter Scott that in this article the QR showed its independence from Government.
Murray MS., Paid Contributors List for issue Number 8: the same person was paid for articles 10 and 15 in this Number. Murray MS., George Ellis to JM, [n.d.], having mentioned the review of Huskisson (see #124), says that Canning and Huskisson are waiting to see a revise (of another article). Murray MS., Ellis to JM, Sunday [Sept. 1810], says he has erased all but one of the allusions to the Edinburgh Review as requested by Murray. Murray MS., Ellis to JM, [22 Nov. 1810], says that 'Sir John will enliven the Number' and it is intended as a complement to the review of Huskisson (#124). Murray MS., Ellis to JM, [Nov. or Dec. 1810], say that this article is designed to compete with the Edinburgh Review in a 'popular' article and speaks of proofs of it being sent to Canning and Huskisson. Devon MS. 1149M (f.80), WG to Edward Copleston, 9 Jan. 1811, says Ellis is too busy with 'Huskisson' (#124) and 'Sir John' to review 'Roscoe' (#134). Harewood MS., George Ellis to George Canning, Sunday, 2 Dec. [1810], referring not to 'Huskisson' but to another article, thanks Canning for his revise and promises to hand it on to 'Giff' along with Canning's letter of the '28th'. NLS MS. 3879 (ff.227-28), WG to Walter Scott, 27 Oct. 1810, says for the next issue (Number 8). 'George will have an article on Finance, auspice Severo, for I think C[anning] will assist.' NLS MS. 3879 (f.289), WG to Scott, 29 Dec. 1810: 'You see that we differ from the ministry respecting the Bullion business. ... I have such reliance on the judgements of those who drew up the article, that I am inclined to hope we cannot be far out. I have gone fairly to work, however, and acquainted Mr Perceval, who expected a different article, with my motive & determination. It is but fair to add, that they also behaved honourably.' Murray MS., 1803-23 Letter Book, George Canning to WG, 9 Dec. 1810, says he received Sir John by post and hopes to return it tomorrow and expects 'another parcel of G. E.'s Husk'n to send me ....'
The subject of this article was reviewed in ER #547, Feb. 1811, by T. R. Malthus, and in ER #574, Aug. 1811, by T. R. Malthus.
JM II's marked QR: 'Geo Ellis but really Geo Canning' [in lighter ink] '& Huskisson'.
JM III's Register: attribution to Ellis and Canning, with the following note: 'Nominally by G.E. Really by Canning & W. Huskisson.' Cites JM II's marked QR .
