Material from the Romantic Circles Website may not be downloaded, reproduced or disseminated in any manner without authorization unless it is for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, and/or classroom use as provided by the Copyright Act of 1976, as amended.
Unless otherwise noted, all Pages and Resources mounted on Romantic Circles are copyrighted by the author/editor and may be shared only in accordance with the Fair Use provisions of U.S. copyright law. Except as expressly permitted by this statement, redistribution or republication in any medium requires express prior written consent from the author/editors and advance notification of Romantic Circles. Any requests for authorization should be forwarded to Romantic Circles:>
By their use of these texts and images, users agree to the following conditions:
Users are not permitted to download these texts and images in order to mount them on their own servers. It is not in our interest or that of our users to have uncontrolled subsets of our holdings available elsewhere on the Internet. We make corrections and additions to our edited resources on a continual basis, and we want the most current text to be the only one generally available to all Internet users. Institutions can, of course, make a link to the copies at Romantic Circles, subject to our conditions of use.
BL Add. MS 28268, ff. 62–63; published in Hart, p. 14
For permission to publish the text of MSS in their possession, the editors wish to thank the Beinecke Rare Books and Manuscript Library, Yale University; Berg Collection of English and American Literature, The New York Public Library, Astor, Lenox and Tilden Foundations; the Bodleian Library Oxford University; the British Library; Boston Public Library; the Syndics of Cambridge University Library; the Syndics of the Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge; Haverford College, Connecticut; the Historical Society of Pennsylvania; the Hornby Library, Liverpool Libraries and Information Services; the Houghton Library, Harvard University; the John Rylands Library, Manchester; the Kenneth Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas; Luton Museum (Bedfordshire County Council); Massachusetts Historical Society; McGill University Library; the National Library of Scotland; the Newberry Library, Chicago; the New York Public Library (Pforzheimer Collections); the Pierpont Morgan Library, New York; the Public Record Offices of Bedford, Suffolk (Bury St Edmunds) and Northumberland, the Master and Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge; the Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle upon Tyne; the Trustees of the William Salt Library, Stafford, the Wisbech and Fenland Museum; the University of Virginia Library.
A research grant from the British Academy made much of the archival work possible, as did support from the English Department of Nottingham Trent University.
All quotation marks and apostrophes have been changed: " for “," for ”, ' for ‘, and ' for ’.
Any dashes occurring in line breaks have been removed.
Because of web browser variability, all hyphens have been typed on the U.S. keyboard
Dashes have been rendered as —
Bloomfield's spelling has not been regularized.
Writing in other hands appearing on these manuscripts has been indicated as such, the content recorded in brackets.
& has been used for the ampersand sign.
£ has been used for £, the pound sign
All other characters, those with accents, non-breaking spaces, etc., have been encoded in HTML entity decimals.
With expedition equal to your own, but with much less warmth, I
humbly beg to reply. It is an irksome task that I am oblidged to justify Mr Hood against your groundless
suspicions. But however I may sink in your estimation I shall retain justice
enough to declare that I have not spoken to Mr Hood during the last 3 weeks, and never yet
heard one word from him on the subject of the present notes. Thus much is due to
him from me, and shall fearlessly be paid as the declaration of truth. Now then,
Sir, I am willing to take all your displeasure on myself. I am aware of the
difficulty of making the quartos differ from the pocket size, but I was not
aware that the mention of any subject connected with the work in hand, in the
channel of an intimate correspondence, would subject me to the hazard of being
discarded by Mr Lofft. I have reason
to rely on his judgment, and allways did; the concurrence of the public in his
judgment of the Farmer’s Boy taught me to rely on it. Does it then follow, that,
if I learn that a dislike subsists in many minds to have my little pieces
prejudged, as they call it, that I am forbidden to say so? I never objected to
your praise, to my shame I speak it; I never objected personally to any applause
which anything of mine might draw from you. I only ventured to mention that previous praise did not please the readers, and that I
thought myself implicated in it. Mr
Hoods name was not mentioned. The animosity between you and Mr Hood has proved always, as I said
it would, my severest trouble. It blocks up the field of fair discussion, stops
my mouth on all occasions where habits of intimacy would prompt me to tell what
I thought, and what I think. The nauseous task of telling who said that, and who
said this, I never will descend to. I have satisfied my own conscience in
endeavouring to state to Mr. Lofft
what I think concerns us both. I have no personal objection
to the notes, I never had. But if the disapprobation of even a small portion of
readers could be avoided, I repeat it, I did not think I was wrong in mentioning
it, though I felt that reluctance which I did. I did not excludeMr. Lofft from writing any critique,
or appendix, or whatever he pleased; I said I should like to write something
myself by way of preface. What was the reply? ‘It is very proper that you
should.’ I then thought that Mr Lofft
would have done the same in his own way, and when the proof of the preface was
returned without, I was disappointed that he had not, and wished that I had said
expressly that the proofs had been revised by him. So much for excluding Mr. Lofft from my poor publication.
If I felt that I deserved these severe censures, I should be
miserable; as I know that I do not, my mind shall be easy come what will. To
write my thoughts I see is impossible without lessening that high opinion which
has been professed for me. I have been extravagantly applauded; few men have had
a severer trial. My Modesty have been extoll’d; my
insolence shall not take place of it in any ones mind, unless what I now write
be so termd. I feel my situation to be novel; the world looks at me in that
light. I am extreemly anxious on that account. I do not pretend to know how
strong a negative in any case my author’s prerogative ought to give me. I have
formerly used it with much greater chance of offending (as I thought) than I did
now. Now, I only suggested; formerly I dictated (in the ‘imagination’),
With these sentiments, never in my life thinking higher of my own purity of principle, I beg to be, sir, with all due and unabated respect,
If the Duke
of Grafton calls at Troston, and my name should be mentioned, it may be more than I
deserve. But if I had made any private communication I
should indeed be that scoundrel which I am becoming in Mr. Lofft’s account.
If the trouble given by the revisal of my publication has robbed Mr Lofft of one pleasure, it will cast a gloom over that train of thinking in my mind; but I shall never be ungrateful.